/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.1810146]

How many of your have a strong enough sense of self-awareness to admit that you are not of above-average intelligence? Statistically not everyone can be above-average although no one seems to admit it.

Corollary: For those of you who claim to be of above-average intelligence but lack accomplishments to back it up (I am defining accomplishment to be OUTSIDE the realm of tests so grades, SAT score, and IQ don't count) feel that you don't have these things because you a) didn't apply yourself b) are misunderstood?

[♥ !Rrxa7zePwI No.1810149]

you are not smart op.

[Rangaha !KJKZ7n2h3I No.1810150]

inb4 ALL TRIPFAGS ARE BUTTMAD AND RETUHRD'D

Lots of people are aware of it. They just don't feel the need to bluntly state "I'm not of above-average intelligence."

[Anonymous No.1810159]

>>1810149
Never said I was. Just curious about /lit/'s view of themselves.

[Anonymous No.1810164]

>above-average intelligence
>IQ don't count
>above average
>measuring doesn't count
Ah. This is obviously some strange usage of the word "intelligence" that I hadn't previously been aware of.

[Anonymous No.1810172]

>>1810164
I think I'm trying to get at the "I know I'm smart because the test told me so but haven't done much with it" cognitive dissonance and how people deal with it.

I guess you could also say there are the "I just don't test well" folks too who have the reverse problem.

[Anonymous No.1810179]

Above average comprehension but terrible at actually working with concepts. Most of my papers are unoriginal and just rehash/summarize arguments instead of synthesizing them in the good old Hegelian sense. Is there anything I can do to bolster my abstract thinking?

[Malavox !1CuTO6dxKo No.1810180]

I like to think that i'm smart, though I know that i'm probably not. I do below average in school, though I don't apply myself at all. I can't stand the kids who talk down on you because they're ranked high in the class, but can't follow a word i'm saying when we talk of things outside the realm of notebooks and pencils.

[♥ !Rrxa7zePwI No.1810181]

the deal with life activity is just that, you need to do stuff, to live. in tests, you are forced to do stuff, but this condition of extant activity is not there in real life where finding something to do affects what you actually do. case in point, dead, smart people are not accomplishing anything.

[Anonymous No.1810187]

>>1810181

i would posit that decomposing is an accomplishment

[♥ !Rrxa7zePwI No.1810190]

>>1810187
yea and you get extra points for having nice smelling poo

[Anonymous No.1810192]

>>1810179
Published academic work would count under my personal definition of intellectual accomplishments.

[Anonymous No.1810193]

Define accomplishments.

[Anonymous No.1810195]

Throughout growing up school had always been a joke for me. I got everything done quick and always did it right. Same with high school.

My problem is that I know I can be above average but I lack the will to do anything about it. I'm extremely apathetic and I am content with reading books and working a shit job the rest of my life.

[Anonymous No.1810197]

>>1810193
Good point.

Creative accomplishment would be artistic creations (paintings, novels, poems, video games, films, compositions, etc.) that have been acknowledgement as important/beautiful/good by a group of peers.

Scientific/humanities accomplishments would be things like publishing work in academic journals.

[Anonymous No.1810198]

Considering the entire world's population of 6.8 billion people, many of which are barely literate and receive little to no schooling, I am certain that almost every user of this board is above average intelligence.

[Anonymous No.1810199]

>>1810197

Why do your notions of accomplishment all depend on people other than yourself and the creator?

[Anonymous No.1810202]

Is it possible that the actual problem is that your performance on tests in school was a fluke and you have a distorted view of your own smartness?

[FM No.1810209]

I am of above-average intelligence (IQ about 150-160), but don't feel I've accomplished anything of note. I have an okay career as a software developer, and I guess I'm one of the better developers in my company, but that doesn't seem like much to brag about. I play jazz bass pretty well, but have never applied myself to that practice with the dedication it takes to get really good.

I have a pretty poor attention span, not much drive, and suffer periodically from depression. My memory often seems to me to be the weakest part of the components of my cognitive performance, and yet I've never done much to try to improve it.

I'm now 37, and I really wonder whether I will ever do anything I'll be really proud of. Thanks, OP, now I will kill myself.

[Anonymous No.1810211]

>>1810199
Because contributions that are measurable in their impact (art's effect on the emotions of others, engineering causing a positive impact, the world or science's increasing our knowledge of it) seems like a useful construct for judging intelligence.

[Anonymous No.1810215]

>>1810209
A better solution would be to attempt to prove your intelligence through accomplishments.

[Anonymous No.1810218]

>(I am defining accomplishment to be OUTSIDE the realm of tests so grades, SAT score, and IQ don't count)

Here's the problem: You're asking for real-world, concrete accomplishments as proof of evidence. Such accomplishments are the result of more than just intelligence, and many many successful people are not highly intelligent by most metrics. If SATs, IQs, and test grades do NOT accurately measure intelligence, but real-world accomplishments DO, then we need to look at how you're defining "intelligence." Which is a whole 'nother can of worms.

[FM No.1810221]

>>1810215
Why would I choose to do something merely to "prove" that I'm intelligent? I know I'm smart. So fucking what?

[Anonymous No.1810223]

>>1810211

What if someone created a piece of art that everyone hated, but you liked? Would you consider that person (and yourself) to be less intelligent?

[Anonymous No.1810227]

A highly intelligent person who lacks direction and motivation will easily be less productive than a highly determined person of lesser intelligence. Intelligence is a measure of ability, not accomplishment.

disclaimer: I'm pretty brilliant, and ascribe my lack of accomplishments to a struggle with depression and general lack of direction.

[Anonymous No.1810235]

Your post, OP, implies that above-average intelligence entails "achievement". Being able to grasp calculus will probably put you "above-average" in terms of mathematical ability amongst the entire population. Creating calculus would be a work of genius (Newton, Leibniz).
Above-average intelligence will get you jobs in IT or even in Law or Medicine, as opposed to manual labour and skillness work like answering telephones at a call-centre. Journalists have an "above average" command of language, but none of them are expected to write a novel with language as descriptive as Nabokov.

[Anonymous No.1810236]

>>1810221
The point I'm getting at is how do you know you are smart? Because of a test? Getting A's in high school? Maybe it was a false positive.

[Anonymous No.1810239]

>>1810236

So why are your measures of intelligence any better?

How about you define intelligence for us?

[Anonymous No.1810244]

>>1810235
Actually that is a great point. I've been confusing above-average and genius.

[Anonymous No.1810249]

>>1810227
>I'm pretty brilliant, and ascribe my lack of accomplishments to a struggle with depression and general lack of direction.

There's thousands upon thousands of depressed, fledgling intellectuals in modern society.
Brilliant people overcome depression and general lack of direction.

[Anonymous No.1810253]

>>1810244
Yes, I thought so.

[Anonymous No.1810254]

>>1810239
I think the second questions sort of imply a way. Use creative accomplishments (i.e. original work) to define intelligence. I would find someone who has managed to write a novel or get published in the Lancet to be smarter than someone who got all A's at Harvard and has an IQ of > 150.

[Anonymous No.1810255]

I like how people in this thread have to impose a strict hierarchy on intelligence. You can't even see how overtly you're spewing capitalist ideology, can you?

[Anonymous No.1810257]

>>1810254

Now answer my first question, why are those better measures of intelligence?

[Anonymous No.1810261]

>>1810235
Exactly. I'm a well regarded analyst for a pretty big bank. I have never really produced any sort of important intellectual creation, but nevertheless, I'd still consider myself of above-average intelligence.

[Hi IQ FAG No.1810266]

>a) didn't apply yourself
I got an IQ that puts me somewhere in the top 0.5%

Why do people fail to realize that you can be high IQ but lack dedication to getting rich?

[FM No.1810280]

>>1810236
Ah, I see. As others have already been challenging your proposed "new" measure of intelligence cum accomplishment, I won't really take that up in describing myself. But by the standard notion of intelligence, I needn't rely on test scores or grades. I figure things out more quickly, understand difficult things more completely, analyze problems better, and synthesize concepts to find novel solutions better than almost anyone else I personally know. How do I know I do those things? Well, because others confirm that my solutions are better, that the answers I come up with are correct, etc.

I think you're cart-before-horseing a bit with your apparent assumption that popular tests are creating false measures of intelligence. In my opinion, tests like the IQ test continue to be used because their results seem to rank higher those people whom we would have called "more intelligent" by the colloquial understanding. That's not to say that the IQ test *doesn't* create some false measures, but I think it also has some demonstrable validity. Your "test", I think, doesn't correlate to intelligence, but rather to a combination of intelligence, personality, upbringing, and other factors. The "accomplishment quotient" measures--what else?--accomplishment, and those that would score high on it probably have a number of factors in their favor that would contribute to their extraordinary performance on the test.

[Anonymous No.1810283]

>>1810199
the solopsism has to end somewhere

isolation = death, bro

just look at the guy in the OP pic

[Anonymous No.1810290]

>>1810283

DFW died because he had clinical depression. He wasn't a hermit, or in any way isolated. He was part of a church group, for crying out loud.

[Anonymous No.1810302]

Define intelligence OP. We need to sort out what we mean before there can be a discussion.

[Anonymous No.1810305]

>>1810266
Publishing articles for journals or creating art doesn't necessarily mean you get money for it. You can be accomplished without money.
>>1810257
They seem more predictive. Past artistic achievement seems to be more predictive of future achievement.

[FM No.1810308]

This conversation reminds me of the recent "college is useless" propaganda film. Seems there's a significant cadre of people who are less intelligent (or perceive themselves to be, or think that others see them that way) who are emphasizing (mostly financial) success as a form of compensation. I guess there are probably enough smart dickheads out there to make this unsurprising, but it's a shame, really. There may be some people who have envied my intelligence, but if they knew how miserable I have often been, I think they wouldn't have traded places with me.

[Anonymous No.1810314]

>>1810280
I actually like your first paragraph's working definition of intelligence a little.
As for your second paragraph, I guess what the core difference between the two sides is that one believes that "the system" for generating accomplishments is corrupt to the point where intelligence is only a small determining factor while the other side things that though the system is corrupt it isn't corrupt to the point that true talent wouldn't bubble to the surface.

[Hi IQ FAG No.1810324]

Okay Im just gonna pwn you all now.

Things society value most highly:

1. Having a beautiful partner
2. Being rich
3. Being tall, fit and good looking
4. Having lots of friends and being sociable

Notice how most of these things have very little to do with IQ?

Also, to answer the question of how do you know your smart. You notice yourself excelling at things, being faster to pick things up, noticing things first, putting things together first, coming up with the good iddea, etc consistently throughout your life, and then you can conclude you are probably very smart (if you are not delusional that is). This backed up with a high IQ score and I think you have more than enough to conclude you're smart. But you know what? Who gives a flying fuck?

[Anonymous No.1810347]

Good thread everyone, it caused me to think more deeply about this.

[FM No.1810354]

>>1810324
> Okay Im just gonna pwn you all now.
> Proceeds to state the obvious, with very little pwnage in evidence.
Here's a good example of how someone who is (self-reported to be) smart might overestimate the importance of their thoughts. Slow down, junior. Just because you have a high native intelligence doesn't mean pearls of wisdom fall from your lips.

[Anonymous No.1810370]

>>1810354
>implying I spent more than a minute on that post
>implyinh intelligence and arrogance are mutually exclusive

[FM No.1810378]

>>1810370
>implying I spent more than a minute on that post
Good god, I hope you didn't spend long on it. But in any case, I didn't imply that. I just stated that you failed to do what you said you were doing.
>implyinh intelligence and arrogance are mutually exclusive
> Nope.vbs
Also, you forgot your name. Notsamefagging?

[Anonymous No.1810379]

I don't really think about how smart I am compared to other people, because it's depressing either way.

[Anonymous No.1810383]

If you cannot use it, then your so called above average intelligence is worthless. Might as well not be there. So we could define intelligence as both the ability and application of your mind.

You prove it in fields where your effort is recognised by your peers, who also are of higher intelligence. Which would be academia.

[Anonymous No.1810384]

>>1810378
ur pathetic

[FM No.1810388]

>>1810384
Maybe. Mostly bored.

[Anonymous No.1810397]

if intelligence is so useless then why are people going out of their way to prove how useless it is? seems paradoxical to me.

[Anonymous No.1810403]

>>1810383

But what if your peers are wrong?

[Anonymous No.1810407]

>>1810403
I have no peers. No man can judge me.

[Anonymous No.1810410]

I am above average intelligence. I scored in the 99th percentile on the SAT. I have an A- average, and that is because I don't apply myself to my fullest potential. It is not cognitively dissonant to suggest that an above average intelligence person would have lower than average grades because they just didn't care enough or weren't motivated enough to spend more time on homework than on things they care more about.

[Sherlock Holmes Guy No.1810415]

I'd hesitate to say I'm above average intelligence, but I definitely possess an above average amount of curiosity, which *looks* like above average intelligence, especially coupled with a determination to master and fully grasp the things that attract my attention.

Average people are quite capable of genius. That quote about genius being one percent inspiration, ninety-nine percent perspiration is true. Take the thing that you have a knack or interest for, work yourself to the bone developing it over the course of years, and it will appear to others as though you were gifted your abilities by the gods.

[FM No.1810419]

>>1810383
This really is badly reasoned.

It sounds like you're saying
A) Intelligence without use is worthless
B) Worthless things might as well not be there
C) Things that might as well not be there don't actually exist
Thus,
D) Unused intelligence doesn't exist, so only applied intelligence is real intelligence.

Even if we grant that unused intelligence is "worthless", that does not require a redefinition of intelligence. It simply leads us to emphasize the application of intelligence as that which gives intelligence its worth.

This thread is off the rails now...OP has no coherent argument to make. Let's go F5 that camwhore thread.

[Anonymous No.1810434]

Well, actually, IQ in the traditional sense (one rarely espoused these days) was calculated such that the median score on a measure would be normalized at 100. Now, the larger your sample, the more closely intelligence numbers will reflect a normal curve, but you have to remember that we aren't sampling randomly. We're sampling a population p that is part of the larger population P. Measures of IQ are sampled at random from people across the world, representing results from the greater population P, but measures of how many people on /lit/ think they are above average are sampled from the limited population p. You cannot correlate one statistical term to the other, because they don't describe the same populations. Properly rigorous examination would require the same cohort of subjects be asked their opinion, preferably at the same time that they took the IQ test. This is a common error in sampling practice, which can nevertheless do untold damage to the social sciences.
tl;dr:
It is statistically possible for everyone here to be above-average.

[Anonymous No.1810440]

>>1810403

They are not. Some of them may be, but the collective oppinion is right. Of course, opinions are subject to change, you might be proven intelligent in the future, or you might lose it with age.

[Anonymous No.1810443]

>>1810440

>the collective opinion is right

Always?

[Anonymous No.1810448]

>>1810434
>It is statistically possible for everyone here to be above-average
>only considered big p and little p, but no little q
>conclusion based on 2/3 of the necesary terms hence is invalid

[Anonymous No.1810454]

Why don't grades count as accomplishment?

[Anonymous No.1810461]

>>1810454

Because in the real world you're not considered accomplished if you go around saying 'I got an A in English, you know'. The only level when it becomes an accomplishment is postgraduate education at University.

[Anonymous No.1810465]

>>1810419

Yes to 1 and 4. Intelligence without use does not exist. If you live your life browsing 4chan and working at the local store, that reflects your level of intelligence, average If you are of high levels of intelligence you will acts will prove it.

[Anonymous No.1810468]

accomplishments noot equal to IQ morons

if it were we wouldnt need the concept of IQ now would we?

DEEERRRRPPP A HERRRRRP

[Anonymous No.1810489]

>>1810461
>mfw I did a phd (physics) at a very good school and some of the people there werent even that smart

and if you are talking masters, NIGGA PLEASE, any donkey can get a masters in physics. means nowt

[Anonymous No.1810494]

>>1810448
I'm not sure what you're saying.
Do you mean q as the conclusion in a syllogism? Then you have mistaken the terms of statistics for those of propositional logic.
Do you mean q as the student distribution? If so, why would we require that when comparing measures of different phenomena from different samples?

[Anonymous No.1810496]

Depends on which form of intelligence you are discussing OP. As you can no doubt tell from cases of aspergers, soaring to incredible heights in one form of intelligence can also mean you're in the doldrums with one or more other forms of intelligence.
Including social intellect.

[Anonymous No.1810497]

>>1810489
I would be excited to read your dissertation. What was the title?

[Anonymous No.1810500]

>>1810461

I'm still not convinced. What is accomplishment in "the real world"? The gain of material wealth?

[Anonymous No.1810506]

>>1810497
why? do you find it hard to believe a phd would post on /lit/?

[FM No.1810509]

>>1810465
> Yes to 1 and 4. Intelligence without use does not exist. If you live your life browsing 4chan and working at the local store, that reflects your level of intelligence, average If you are of high levels of intelligence you will acts will prove it.
> ohgodwhatisthis

Taking you seriously: D does not follow from A, and you've provided no other acceptable premises which would lead us to D. You might find a course in logic helpful.

You've merely asserted a new definition, without any coherent reason why the old definition is not sufficient. Give it up--this argument won't stick. You'll get more traction with arguing that intelligence without application is worthless. I think it's still wrong, but there'd at least be more to discuss there.

[Anonymous No.1810510]

hi >>1810494

>>1810448 here

pic related

[Anonymous No.1810518]

>>1810510

[Anonymous No.1810532]

>>1810518
little p? little q? big p?

face it kid, the clues were there...

[Anonymous No.1810537]

>>1810146
Well OP, since you brought it up, I'm pretty sure that I'm personally at least "above average" if not much higher in intelligence.

My main excuses for not having accomplished anything are (without getting too detailed):

1. A fear of failure and consequent failure to engage in organizational work i.e. student organizations, internships, or employment. This is probably due largely to my father's authoritarian parenting style, which has atrophied many of my decision-making skills and undermined my self-confidence.

2. I'm only 21 years old and I'm graduating, albeit in a shit-tier major, from one of the top 50 Universities in the country (top 10 in my state, which is cool)... Still, being as young as I am and growing up in the suburbs, I haven't had many crazy cool opportunities. I'm still working on it.

3. There are so many things I could be good at, but I get bored with most things pretty easily and see the process of getting to high-capital positions as requiring too much petty interaction and bureaucratic bullshit... as I get older, though, I find these things worth putting up with.

4. I used a lot of drugs during my late teen years and am still trying to sort out some of the damage I did in that time. No big deal, life goes on.

So while I can't speak for everyone else, I'm sure that these are pretty common hindrances to people of "above average" intelligence who are not groomed for success.

[Anonymous No.1810538]

>>1810532
Oh, I don't doubt that you trolled the guy. But it's just stupid. I didn't find it clever in the slightest.

[Anonymous No.1810544]

>>1810538
admittedly could have been better, id say a solid 3/10, nonetheless.

[Anonymous No.1810558]

>>1810544
All right, I'll give you that much. But aren't bored with trolling yet? I don't understand how anyone still finds any but the best trolls to be amusing in the slightest.

OP, is successful trolling sufficient application of intelligence to count?

[Anonymous No.1810560]

>>1810489
this. all these people talking about publishing articles as evidence of intelligence have clearly never done post-graduate work. sure, you might not be the next Skinner or Piaget, changing your field forever, but you'll inevitably publish something if you really want to. i mean, realistically, if you're below the statistical average you'll never get the grade reqs to progress past undergrad, but, still, you don't need to be *that* far beyond it.

[Anonymous No.1810564]

>>1810537
i second that. an average intelligence kid from a privileged backround will attain success more effortlessly than a smart kid from a less privileged background will.

true story. any smart sociologist will tell you this.

[Anonymous No.1810573]

>>1810558
who said i was smart? im a simple fool who knows finds pleasure in the little things like practical jokes and trolling

[Anonymous No.1810579]

>>1810560
agreed. its only the slightly averagely above average that actually believe doing a degree makes them intelligent.

[Anonymous No.1810585]

I think I'm above average because everyone around me was always so fucking stupid. If the average is low, then being above is not hard. That being said, things changed a little when I went to college, the people around me changed and I started to think I was just average, but one of my professors (who I think is brillant) said that I'm smart, I just had to believe him.

I have accumplished a lot by my age. I'm at the best college in my country, speak 4 languages, published a book, wrote two plays. And I'm only 18, so I think I'm in a good path.

[Anonymous No.1810592]

>>1810585
>accumplished a lot by my age
>I'm at the best college in my country
>published a book, wrote two plays.
>accumplished

[Anonymous No.1810595]

>>1810592
English is not my first language, I'm better at speaking than writing.

[Anonymous No.1810617]

>>1810595
whats your 1st language?

[Anonymous No.1810630]

>a) didn't apply myself

This, pretty much. I've had plenty of chances to prove myself that I never took, and while I was intelligent enough I was also very socially clueless for the longest time. I'm twenty-one and while I might be my age or above intellectually, I still feel about fourteen emotionally.

[Anonymous No.1810631]

>>1810617
Portuguese.

[Anonymous No.1810650]

>>1810631
well done getting published at aged 18. have you sold many copies yet?

[Anonymous No.1810666]

>>1810630
>while I was intelligent enough I was also very socially clueless for the longest time.

can you explain why you think this can happen?
do you think social intelligence is a different kind of intelligence?

[Anonymous No.1810671]

>>1810650
It got oficially published like two weeks ago or something, but I hardly think it will sell well (that sentence looks horrible, it is right?), Brazilians don't read :(

[Anonymous No.1810675]

>>1810666

A person can memorize a lot of information about things and even be very intuitive while still having difficulty keeping tabs on how they themselves act and talk around others.

[Apostrophe !8hzzLmleDA No.1810678]

>>1810666
mal-adaption to society due to being an "outcast"

[Anonymous No.1810677]

>>1810650
No, it got published like two weeks ago or something, but I hardly think it will sell well (that sentence looks horrible, is it right), Brazilians don't read :(

[Anonymous No.1810685]

>>1810650
No, it was published like two weeks ago or something. But I hardly think it will sell well (what a weird sentence), Brazilians don't read much :(

[Anonymous No.1810693]

Fuck my internet is shit tonight because of the rain and I posted like 3 times. Sorry.

[Anonymous No.1810697]

Hmm, lets see, i finished school a few years in advance, probably nothing to do with intelligence just the ability to ram lots of fact/get along with older students without getting bullied. What else, took out two bachelors in two years, probably with just the same methodology. Top grades, top tier schools. And a pretty sweet job afterwards/good pay. Really, all you need is the ability to do shit.

[Anonymous No.1810699]

>>1810693
Check the little box next to your post and the delete button is at the bottom right of the page

[Anonymous No.1810704]

>>1810678
>mal-adaption to society due to being an "outcast"
what do you think made him an outcast?

[Anonymous No.1810710]

>>1810704

Not being taught right, or being oblivious/defiant of social norms.

[Apostrophe !8hzzLmleDA No.1810712]

>>1810704
disregard of societal norms due to different thought process(high iq)

[Anonymous No.1810721]

>>1810710
>oblivious/defiant of social norms.

I dont understand how someone can be smart at math or whatever, but cant understand social norms. whereas some people are the opposite. surely if you are smart you can "work out" social norms too?

[Anonymous No.1810728]

>>1810699
Thank you :)

[Anonymous No.1810731]

>>1810712

Different thought process doesn't equate to high IQ. That's just an urban legend based on this idea of economy of intelligence. It all boils down to just world theory, where people want to believe that if someone's deficient in one way they must be gifted in another. That's because people want to believe that everyone is equal, but it really doesn't work that way.

[Anonymous No.1810736]

>>1810721

They are based on different systems of thought. People are more spontaneous and mathematics is set. Try studying psychology and you will realize it is so vague and ambiguous that mathematics hardly compares.

[♥ !Rrxa7zePwI No.1810743]

>>1810721
it's like running the world in virtualization, you have to interpret certain gestures and whatnot in your own way, and there is no natural response to them.

[Anonymous No.1810751]

>>1810731

do you think social intelligence is a different kind of intelligence?
>I dont understand how someone can be smart at math or whatever, but cant understand social norms. whereas some people are the opposite. surely if you are smart you can "work out" social norms too?

do you have an answer to this?

[Anonymous No.1810754]

>>1810721

Social norms change every decade, and are so different even among families in the same neighborhood that things are thrown off. For example, there is a Spanish family who lives near me to whom an appearance and body language that is considered "Feminine" in the U.S. is considered fairly masculine. I also live near a homophobic, hypermasculine redneck who complains about the "spic queers" living in his neighborhood.

[Anonymous No.1810774]

Social norms change around a lot with every workplace, home and classroom you are shuffled into. Some people take longer to emotionally adapt to that than others, and old habits can kind of die hard. Notice how people that spent most of their lives in their parents' homes, like homeschooled kids, leave a bad impression when they finally have go to work or school later in life. This is because they are not properly socialized. Some people might also be transferred from one environment to another and be so shocked and disgusted by their new environment that they will react against it. Imagine if you were an American and were forced to move in with a conservative Islamic family in the middle east and follow their traditions completely. You would probably not adjust well, if at all.

[Anonymous No.1810784]

>>1810774

To continue, your failure to adapt would be completely in spite of the fact that you are very logical, intuitive or well-read. In some places, you might have read or heard something that it's simply taboo to talk about and not realize it when you scare or anger people because of it. This is namely because they assume it is natural not to mention such things. They won't call you on it to your face but it will become a problem and it will affect how people see you. Your intuition has adapted in a very specific way that is hard to change.

[Anonymous No.1810789]

>>1810774
>>1810754

ok fine but im talking about your average personm who goes to high school at aged 11 or whatever. social skill seems to be a seperate thing to intelligence. which seems to indicate it is a different type of intelligence altogether. because if it wasnt, then wouldnt the so called "more intelligent" people be good socially as well as academically?

[Anonymous No.1810792]

>>1810789

There is such a thing as people who excel both socially and academically. Barack Obama and David Petraeus are two examples. However, they are both very rare cases.

[Anonymous No.1810794]

>>1810146
I'm a guy who thinks that if you look at how I am I'm probably of above-average intelligence but I neglect this fact because I probably lie to myself to make me feel better and so on.

So, I'm probably not of above-average intelligence but I sure hope I am, I'm not even going to deny that.

[Anonymous No.1810798]

>>1810784
you seem to be saying "smart people tend to say the wrong things in public"

why is it that other people realize not to say these things and they dont?

[Anonymous No.1810813]

>>1810792
ok sure. but why is it that intelligence doesnt seem to help with understanding and getting along socially?

[Anonymous No.1810815]

>>1810798
Good point.

To OP:

I'd love to be of above-average intelligence and I think that the facts point toward that but I suspect that I only think so because I wanna be above-average intelligence.

Oh and, well, tl;dr:

I want to, but I'm probably not.

[Anonymous No.1810819]

>>1810813
Most intelligent people are on the border of insanity.
And also, it would be harder for you to interact in a world where everyone were hillbillies, right?
That's probably how it's like to be intelligent, everyone else except you are fucking stupid and you don't think on the same "wavelength" as they do.

[Anonymous No.1810825]

I am of above-average intelligence:

- 1st in my high school class, by a lot
- went to an Ivy League school
- finishing my dissertation in particle physics

despite all that, i really didn't apply myself and would be doing better if i had.

[Anonymous No.1810827]

>>1810825
I just considered myself and how simple it is for you to say that you're of above-average intelligence and I've come to the conclusion that I probably think very lowly of myself.

Uuh. But no, I'm not the best in my class, I can't be of above-average intelligence.

Is it just for me that it feels disgusting and wrong to say that you are better than other people? At least if other people aren't bragging, if other people are bragging then I will push them down into the dirt like the fucking animals they really are.

[Anonymous No.1810828]

>>1810798
because aspergers.

[Anonymous No.1810832]

>>1810819
>it would be harder for you to interact in a world where everyone were hillbillies, right?
>That's probably how it's like to be intelligent, everyone else except you are fucking stupid and you don't think on the same "wavelength" as they do.
you just summed

Story of my life. But the difference being that I also know: How I am supposed to act to appear "socially skilled" and what to say and what not to say to appear "socially skilled."

So why cant other smart people work it out?

[Anonymous No.1810835]

>>1810828

>implying asperger's = smart

hahaha wow

[Anonymous No.1810839]

24 hour study room bunnies mirin my cerebrum

[Anonymous No.1810841]

>>1810832
To add to that. I also know that a certain realm of conversation is beyond what I can talk about with people because they will just misinterpret it and I will get misunderstood and frustrated and have to pull the old "Never mind, just forget it." That is really annoying and makes you feel upset. It's moments like that when you feel that those friends are not as smart as you thought they were and you will never be able to speak to them on a level. feelslonelyman.jpg

[Anonymous No.1810842]

>>1810835
people with aspergers are very smart you fucking retard!!

they just dont pick up on certain things the same way you do, like facial expressions, and social cues.

[Anonymous No.1810844]

>>1810842
Wow, really now?
Not necessarily.. Hm, I spelled that wrong I believe.

>>1810841
Yeah, I know that feel bro. But there's that slight possibility that we just suck at explaining.

[Anonymous No.1810846]

>>1810825
only like 1% of people with genius potential ever really apply themselves so dont feel bad man, its pretty normal to underachieve terribly and still ace all your exams and a phd.

[Anonymous No.1810847]

I have a high IQ- over 140, have no physical or mental disabilities.and come from a stable, loving family.

My failure to achieve anything in life is entirely my own fault- laziness, self-indulgence, arrogance and a tendency to give up easily.

There, I said it.

[Anonymous No.1810852]

>>1810847
>have no physical or mental disabilities.and come from a stable, loving family.
why do i feel that there is a lie in there somewhere?

[Anonymous No.1810856]

>>1810844
>Yeah, I know that feel bro. But there's that slight possibility that we just suck at explaining.
I hope that's the case. I'll try harder with my explanations in future.

[Anonymous No.1810858]

>>1810856
It's just that far too often that you don't explain the idea in total because you're so caught up in the excitement yourself.

[Apostrophe !8hzzLmleDA No.1810862]

>>1810858
that feel, that feel.

[Anonymous No.1810864]

>>1810858
Either that or them understanding the idea would involve them having to already know about another 100 concepts you already have in your brain first.

>mfw I cant just give them a transfer of the contents of my brain

[Anonymous No.1810869]

I'm doing well in college, an NCO in the military, and have a loving family. I'm handsome, and enjoy academia very much so. I still fail with women, and every paper I write, despite the grade, is still shit.

The best thing I have going for me is self-reflection. I'll admit it, even if I am smart, I don't often have the confidence to apply it.

[Anonymous No.1810872]

>>1810869
go on, /lit/ is here for you bro.

[Anonymous No.1810877]

>>1810872

Aw, thanks bro. What more could you possibly want to hear?

[Anonymous No.1810907]

>I don't often have the confidence to apply it.
what do you mean by this? I think I may suffer from motivational problems rather than confidence...in particular procrastinatiion problems...

[Anonymous No.1810915]

>>1810907
Stop being stupid and do not try to study at home.
Procastrinate your procastrination.