/lit/ - Literature

>>12671116
I'm no fan of Vox and I have no idea what rigorous sources they used to get the figure but, yeah, sounds about right.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was 150.

My IQ is probably 110

>>12671116
Where does JBP claim his IQ is 150?

Depends if it's WAIS or Mensa. You can have a high IQ and be a fairly poor reasoner. Psychologists have studied this and even intelligent people have issues with belief bias, automatic heuristical reasoning and Bayesian probability.

>>12671169
>Bayesian probability

Shit's fucking wizard magic, I tells ya.

>>12671127
neither would I, I dislike him immensely but in the field of psychology he seems to know his stuff

>>12671169
>>12671176
>bayesian probability
jesus christ not a fucking rationalist

I’m sorry, but JBP is not even close to 150. He’s maybe a 120 or even a 115. He slightly above midwit.

Just look at his videos where he blatantly misinterprets post-modernism, Jung, Marx, and Nietzsche.

Hell, his video on Foucault alone should be enough to show that he’s around midwit. He claims that Foucault saw discipline as an inherently evil thing and Foucault never even gives his opinion (in D&P) on whether or not he likes he disciplinary system.

>>12671116
>implying you can estimate someone's IQ from their behavior
I am professionally confirmed 145 and I act like a complete retard.

Probably closer to 115, just because most people are somewhere around there. Peterson's incredibly articulate. His brain teems with ideas; I see no evidence it thinks

>>12671188
Just because he's intellectually lazy doesn't mean he's dumb.

>>12671197
yeah it does, pic related

>>12671206
I don't like him but he knows how to play the media and his debate opponents. He's smart in the same sense Trump is smart; I don't know if it translates to IQ, but its certainly useful.

>>12671116
>Vox Day claims 115.
that's ridiculous - i don't even like jbp, but there's no fucking way i'm 10 points above him

>>12671116
Im no peterson fanboy but Vox's iq is definitely less than 90

>>12671194
What would Chesterton's IQ be? I estimate it at 345 lbs.

>>12671116
My IQ is 140 and I'm pretty good at telling if other people are above or below me.

Peterson's IQ is most definitely higher than mine. He's still a very sloppy and irresponsible academic and totally brainwashed by the Jew.

>>12671239
Chesterton? The jolly fat fucker? Man was decently clever, probably 120s/130s. For what it's worth Etienne Gilson, the 20th century's top Thomist, thought Chesterton's book on Aquinas was the greatest piece of Thomistic scholarship ever written and supposedly Chesterton dictated it to his secretary in one draft

>>12671188
He seems to read secondary literature which confirms his own dispositions. That's the only way to explain his 'interpretations' or else he's really as simple as everyone thinks he is.

>>12671253
Whats a good intro-level Chesterton book? I'm trying to learn to be happy and a jolly, fat fucker might be the ticket

>>12671180
what is your frame of reference for even making such a judgment

>>12671188
>>12671194
Lmao imagine being a NEET on the internet calling a former Harvard professor a midwit

>>12671270
Dale Ahlquist selected some of his essays and put them in a book called In Defense of Sanity. I'd start there. Ahlquist (def spelling his name wrong) is probably the world's leading Chestertonian. EWTN broadcast a few seasons of some show where Ahlquist explained some of Chesterton's knottier ideas. I don't even care for Chesterton anymore, but I still rewatch the show. There's a few episodes on youtube. I can't remember what it's called but a few seconds of Googling should find it. Word of advice: read him slowly, only a handful of essays a day. Chesterton grows tiring if you spend too much time with him, although he's the damn near perfect companion in short bursts. His Father Brown stories are pretty good, but the same rule applies. The Man Who Was Thursday, a theological spy fantasia, is also a decent starting point. I don't know if you're a CS Lewis fan -- if you're interested in Chesterton you probably like Lewis -- Lewis said that Chesterton's "The Everlasting Man" converted him to Christianity. So there's that.

Bottom line: either In Defense of Sanity or The Man Who Was Thursday. I say the first.

>>12671284
he taught at harvard for two semesters at most iirc and he was a visiting prof. probably means he filled in some intro psych classes for someone else. Peterson hasn't published any psych scholarship worth a damn in almost a decade

>>12671286
Thanks a lot friend, you've been more then helpful

>>12671293
Im just saying thats way more than any of you will ever accomplish. Im not a fan but hes almost certainly smarter than everyone in this thread.

>>12671305
I go to harvard, faggot

>>12671314
Even if you do you're not a professor

>>12671320
prove I'm not, faggot

>>12671305
>>12671314
>>12671320
>>12671326
Jesus fucking Christ. Both of you are faggots. Shut the fuck up.

>>12671326
>asking to prove a negative
You definitely dont go to Harvard

>>12671169
I coauthored a paper on Bayesian chronology and I still don't fucking understand that shit

>>12671116
Is JP considered good-looking and attractive by 4channel standards?

>>12671189
this
i'm a lazy retarded fuck but have an iq of 156

>>12671284
imagine thinking being a Harvard professor in a meme field like psychology requires a high IQ

>>12671116
who cares, IQ isn't a good enough measure

>>12671206
Not in terms of IQ. It's like 180IQ mathematicians knowing nothing of politics and falling inline with dumb trendy shit. IQ is not the whole.

>>12671489
Online tests score me at 130-140, but(and) I'm a total fucking retard.

I'm tested 135 and wouldn't be comfortable calling him less intelligent than I am though I disagree with a great deal of his arguments and behaviour