The Forum's IQ

SealHammer said:
You're supposed to be a genius and yet you don't even know what an ethical appeal is
l4peeIb.gif
Click to expand...

Yeah, I dropped out of school at 10th grade. I had severe ADHD at the time so I don't claim to have that much knowledge, just an ability to learn very quickly. I'm not a genius though. Geniuses have an IQ of 140 or above. I always tell everyone that knowledge is more important than intelligence. I graduated with a GED in the top 1% of the population without studying at all though. They said I did better than any one they've ever seen and every time someone who knows what it means looks at the results they're like "WOW." Literally, they say it out loud. Everytime. lol It gives me good feelz. :)

Jeese, the second you tell people you're smart they just want to prove how dumb you are. lol It's pretty funny actually. It's like what [MENTION=9350]sentientsixpence[/MENTION] told me about how she said she was an INFJ and everyone wanted to prove how you weren't special or that you didn't fit the stereotype of a normal INFJ. hahaha
 
Last edited:
YourFavoriteNightmare said:
What's your IQ?
Click to expand...

Statistically unusual. My full-scale IQ score itself is 136, about two standard deviations away from the average of 100. The spread of sub-scores is slightly weird, though. There is a forty-point difference between my verbal and mathematical scores of 160 and 121, respectively, that I do not know how to explain. The rest are clumped around the overall score, +- 5.

Shrug.

I also would like to open a discussion on IQ. The tests and concept behind it - right or wrong, logical or not. What is intelligence? What is it as defined by IQ tests/results?
Click to expand...

Intelligence is the ability to manipulate abstraction. IQ tests attempt to measure g, or "general intelligence"; scores on IQ tests are simply statistical units used to capture g for the comparison of individual traits and thought processes, and, at the very best, give a rough estimate of mental proficiencies. They are most effectively used in a clinical setting to gauge the effects of neurological conditions and traumas (i.e, someone with retrograde amnesia will likely score badly on recall components, a factor that can be used to design an effective treatment plan). Contrary to popular opinion, IQ is not a measurement of one's personal merit, achievement possibility, or happiness. The study of intelligence began as an attempt to reform the French education system by improving areas of academic weakness in students. I'm not really sure what the hell happened afterwards that led to the rampant use of IQ to deterministically measure one's human potential and merit. Talent must be paired with motivation to be optimally effective and incubate eminent experiences.

Is knowing your IQ important?
Click to expand...

Nope. It does nothing other than provide statistical information about various cognitive faculties that can be used to make tentative inferences based on trends within and between slightly ambiguous categories. Personality tests such as the MMPI and the Big Five are more useful in a practical sense because they give reliable information about your state of being that can be used to compare against one's goals and aspirations.

Would you allow your child to find their IQ score?
Click to expand...

Probably not. Clinical relevance notwithstanding, IQ scores are useless for living one's life well.

Where do you see type/preferences/functions at play? Or a biased toward certain ones? Why do you think INTPs are theoretically the best at these, but are surpassed by INTJs?
Click to expand...

IQ scores correlate most strongly with the pattern-detection component of IQ tests (i.e, matrices and geometric manipulations). If any correlation exists between one's IQ score and their Jungian personality, it might rely on the dominance of either intuitive or sensory functions in their psyche. Intuitive functions rely on pattern manipulation, usually used in a progressive manner engaged by novelty, which can contribute to an openness to possibility that assists pattern detection and manipulation. Before someone crucifies me, I am not implying Intuitives are more intelligent than Sensors; I am simply distinguishing possible trait differences that could explain a factor correlated with IQ scores, which do not necessarily reflect g or intelligence (IQ, g, and intelligence are separate structures, as stated above).

It should also be said that Jungian personality verification is quite difficult and there is currently no absolutely accurate measure to test it with. Therefore, statistical correlations should be used carefully. They are useful, but only to a point. Based on the INTPs I know, Ti-Ne is very good at nailing possibilities to a mental table and slicing them apart with the mind's eye to ascertain which bears the most truthfulness. This can contribute to having high IQ scores through excellent (accurate) pattern-detection skills.

What about emotional IQ? I'd like to throw that in. What is that? What other "intelligences" are there, if any?
Click to expand...

"Emotional intelligence", or EQ, is not considered a valid form of intelligence by the psychological community. Rather, it is thought to be the application of g to a specific domain of experience (i.e, intrapersonal and interpersonal relationships). The same goes for Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences: proficiency at a skill set does not constitute an independent intelligence pertaining specifically to that skill set. Nature and nurture work together.
 
Last edited:
I'm too lazy to do another IQ test. Put me in the dumb category.
 
Hazard said:
So you're telling me that people lose the information of how the individual processes the problem and comes to its conclusion, THEN they give the person a number? If this is true then you're right. The entire science is flawed. Then it really is like just looking at an orange, banana and sandwich and giving it the number "42" because there isn't any science or mental processing of the patient's information at all. Like I said though, I'm not a plumber. I'm not an electrician. I'm not a doctor. IDK about any of those fields and I don't claim to.
Click to expand...

Well there's some science but it's statistical science. It's calculated statistically based on how others perform on the test, a normative sample. It's useful for gauging populations in a very loose manner. However it does not pin down what intelligence actually is.

An IQ of 70 for example doesn't even prove that the person is unintelligent in any absolute sense. It only means that the normative sample did relatively better than them on the test. This is how IQ is calculated. In a nutshell it doesn't measure how smart you are in a vacuum, it measures the difference between you and your surroundings, or what is considered normal. If other people suddenly become 'stupid', and that one 70 IQ person stayed exactly the same, their IQ would jump significantly when tests were renormed.
 
I have taken IQ tests as part of the application process early in my career. The results were never shared, so I don't know my IQ.

IQs are only vaguely interesting. It is almost immediately apparent in conversation if someone is dull, average, or bright. Exceptionally bright individuals are an utter stand-out and very rare.

The quotient may have some practical use in standardising group results and may possibly help in processing large volume vocational aptitude estimations. However, I think results/performance - academic and other are more telling. IQs seems to be the fall-back substitute among bright individuals who are either too lazy, or too dysfunctional reach real achievement; and the easy excuse for dull, or average individuals who have under-achieved.
 
@YourFavoriteNightmare

To answer your INTP vs. INTJ question, I'm not sure why INTPs should be better at it in theory (I guess it's either from their stereotyped name "The Thinkers", or because Ti is summarized to be the function for logical induction).. But I think that INTJs fare better at IQ tests because, 1) Te is a more hands on and active function whilst Ti is more passive in expression, and 2) The added Ni dom helps an INTJ to get the main point and home in on the correct answer quickly, while an INTP's Ti will be left to deal with the endless possibilities that Ne feeds it.. not helpful when you have a time limit and fairly straightforward questions which don't necessarily require heaps of logical reasoning ability but rather an ability to respond to the task at hand quickly and effectively.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Flavus Aquila said:
I have taken IQ tests as part of the application process early in my career. The results were never shared, so I don't know my IQ.

IQs are only vaguely interesting. It is almost immediately apparent in conversation if someone is dull, average, or bright. Exceptionally bright individuals are an utter stand-out and very rare.

The quotient may have some practical use in standardising group results and may possibly help in processing large volume vocational aptitude estimations. However, I think results/performance - academic and other are more telling. IQs seems to be the fall-back substitute among bright individuals who are either too lazy, or too dysfunctional reach real achievement; and the easy excuse for dull, or average individuals who have under-achieved.
Click to expand...

Indeed, results and performance are more telling as they are also what drive the IQ test.

It's kind of like if Steve, Jill, and Alice take the test and are used as the normative sample, their performance on the test would set the bar of 100. Their aptitude, what they achieve, given their age etc. is looked at in full just like one would look at an aptitude test. Then they basically say "this performance is average" and they have the median for the test.

Then Bob comes along and does significantly worse than Steve, Jill, and Alice did. Bob's performance is evaluated against Steve's, Alice's and Jill's performance already, before the number is even assigned. It has to be before the number is assigned because the difference of Bob from the rest is what actually generates the number. The number is like an afterthought - a certification.

Also compare to grading papers in school. To grade the paper it must be evaluated. To compare it with other papers, those other papers must also be evaluated. The practical difference is already apparent even before a standardization is made, which is what allows it to be made.
 
And in fact IQ got the name "Intelligence Quotient" because originally it was a quotient. A quotient being the result of division.

It used to be Mental Age divided by Chronological Age times 100.
 
My IQ these days is potato. You guys can just go ahead and give me the forum idiot card.
 
And to actually answer the question :D, I think if there is a profound difference in IQ that leads to a significant gap in learning and education in a child's peer group or class, then it maybe a good idea to get them tested and then take it from there. I think the best thing a parent can do for a child who is gifted is become self educated about giftedness, including pros and cons of various approaches to communicating and relating to gifted children. Parents who become actively involved in their children's interests and hobbies can be great mentors to their kids, showing them to enjoy their gifts rather than see them as things to separate them or differentiate them from everyone. They can teach them how to use their powers for good and how to enjoy the benefits of their gifts. Also, it helps to join groups or forums or support networks for parents with gifted children. This can enable them to learn more about how to deal with the challenges of raising gifted children who will one day be adults with special talents or gifts.
 
i was tested a few times as a child, and as a result i was taught fifth and sixth grade in one year and skipped to seventh.
although i was never given the actual number, as a teenager my IQ was recorded to be in the superior range.
when i was around 40 i took the test again and it was 127. i feel smarter than i did at 15 but apparently i was much quicker then... or something
 
I don't like the idea of knowing my IQ, it stresses me out and I see no real benefit in knowing it. I don't see it as a meassurement for intelligence, I think that is far too complex for a simple IQ test.
 
Last edited:
[MENTION=6917]sprinkles[/MENTION] I agree with your thoughts on IQ tests. To me, they're a lot like lateral brain teasers:

There was once a recluse who never left his home. The only time anyone ever visited him was when his food and supplies were delivered, but they never came inside. Then, one storm winter night when an icy gale was blowing, he had a nervous breakdown. He went upstairs, turned off all the lights and went to bed. Next morning, he had caused the deaths of several hundred people. How?

The solution tells you little about a person's intellegence. The way they solved it tells you far more. You can learn whether they are imaginative or linear thinkers. Do they have trouble concentrating or will they obsess over the puzzle untill a solution presents itself. Will they focus on the person or the problem.

The results of a person's IQ test may tell you somthing about how they learn or reason, but it's like exploring a shallow pool while ignoring the depth of the ocean.

As for my IQ? Oh it's high, we're taking two digits baby...no wait three...no no, four. Yeah bitches that's how I roll.
 
I didn't take an official test, but I did take the test on the iqtest.com website.

I scored 132 (which puts me in the gifted range).

But I don't think that much of it.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
I took an official test two years ago and scored 146.

I personally think that as others above have stated, there is much more to one's intelligence than that number. Also, everyone learns in a unique way, and if teachers don't take this into account, which is usually the case, then they are limiting effectiveness of learning to one or two types of learners, and when this happens, those whose learning needs aren't addressed will fall behind, and get to a point when they feel they are too dumb/stupid for the class, when the real issue is they aren't getting the perspective they need to understand what is being taught so that they can apply their genius to it.

This is also why I don't like the format of the IQ test because it fails to address the other realms of intelligence besides the logical.
 
What is the relevance of the IQ (except in finding a compatible partner?) Hint: There is no relevance. No one cares. Those who want to argue about their intelligence in real life will find themselves sitting alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top