/sci/ - Science & Math

> revolutionise science or even contribute anything considerable to the planet

What if an intelligent person isn't interested in doing this? What if they have debilitating mental illness? What if they pursue something entirely separate from scientific achievement or pursue nothing at all?

I mean did you even think about how many additional variables there are beyond just intelligence? Silly question.

>>9664153
This, intelligence is separate from ambition or interests, brainlets can still become expert in areas through studying and research, through knowledge they can then contribute to their area of expertise

>>9664153
>What if an intelligent person isn't interested in doing this? What if they have debilitating mental illness? What if they pursue something entirely separate from scientific achievement or pursue nothing at all?
Bullshit excuses. If they can't do anything with all that IQ, then maybe IQ doesn't mean shit in the end. They should stop claiming to be smarter than Newton, they're not.

>>9664178
What does "smarter" mean? It sounds like you're looking for the term "more accomplished," but you also want "smart" and "accomplished" to have the same definition. You desperately want everyone else to fail to notice the pretty clear distinction between being smart and doing things, ostensibly because you have some agenda to push.

>>9664140
What percentage of high IQ ppl are in Mensa though? Mensa is an organization of people jacking their IQ peens.

>>9664184
If you're smart, you accomplish things. I don't care how high your iq is, if it doesn't allow you to do things, then it is not a measure of true inelligence.

>>9664153
>What if an intelligent person isn't interested in doing this? What if they have debilitating mental illness? What if they pursue something entirely separate from scientific achievement or pursue nothing at all?

Okay, valid arguments, what you still have to explain is why its 99.9999999999999% of Mensa members who don't amount to shit. Why not 50% instead? I would even take 70% or 80% and when I say this I don't mean a job at a bank of being an IT manager or whatever, I mean why is there no evidence of these people ever being even as capable as the people they claim to be as smart and smarter than. Stephen Hawking, Einstein, Newton, etc.

Seems like a scam for retards to me.

>>9664190
This is a very dumb post. You're objectively wrong, it's not even a debate. A smart person can sit locked in a dark room for 70 years or they can win a Nobel prize. They can be born starving in a third world country or into a wealthy household. They can develop PTSD or schizophrenia growing up or they can be psychologically healthy. They can be an artist or a scientist. They can be unlucky or they can be lucky. In either case, they're still smart. Being smart and what you do have a very loose connection at best, and only if you are lucky enough to be given opportunities by society or by nature.

I don't think there are that many Mensa members.

>>9664204
Lol. The IQ-tards are always spouting how IQ is an EXTREMELY good predictor of success.

>>9664210
Its expressive exaggeration.

>>9664204
My whole point is iq!=smart, which you missed.

This is a very good argument but everyone on /sci/ will ignore it because they use their IQ to feel good about themselves and see themselves as superior to others.

You cannot reason with people on this board and even though this place is better than /b/, its probably not even better than /v/. The defining quality of /sci/ is egomania and extreme delusions of grandeur.

>>9664231
And his whole point is smart≠success, which you missed. Also, go back to /g/.

>>9664190
>If you're smart, you accomplish things.
That´s not the definition of intelligence (i.e. "smartness"), retard.

>>9664212
It is a better predictor than most other measurable variables.

>>9664140
Because most high IQs in history were not Mensa members. Holy shit, OP, are you actually this stupid?

>>9664204
Except we aren't talking about those edge cases, we're talking about mensa.
The whole point is that if IQ really is so important in predicting intelligence, and mensa members have high IQ, then they all must be very intelligent.

BUT they aren't that accomplished, so if neither IQ (and its extension, intelligence) predict success, why exactly do we care about IQ?

Not real sure about IQ either. It's a rough correlation, but then you have electricians and mechanics with IQs in the 70's and shit in Africa but not really anywhere else.

IQ tests all seem to be pattern recognition with abstract images. I'm sure there are better measures of intelligence.

Anyways, who really knows their IQ anyways besides doing a fake one online? They only 'count' if administered by a professional.

iq is a total meme that's only really useful around 100 mark

>>9664184
Idiots who believe in IQ above all else usually justify their stance with the assertion that a high IQ is necessary, if not the most important component, for a person to become highly successful in any area of life. Yet what OP is saying is clearly suggesting that's not the case. So, if IQ correlate with success very highly, what use it is other than being good at solving a specific type of puzzles?

>>9664140
If I'm not mistaken, the original founders of MENSA envisioned a cadre of super-smart elites who came together to solve world issues, and were supremely disappointed when they realized they got a bunch of lower class people who are obsessed with their scores and just like doing brain puzzles.

I haven't really examined the validity of IQ or MENSA's members, and sometimes I wonder if it exists today as something of a scam, but they could just genuinely be smart people who don't have the desire to do the things you want. There might even be nonproductive behaviors that correlate with exceptional intelligence; like what if these people are also depressed or feel hopeless about their prospects of being mediators of change? What if the most ambitious of us are just in a state of blind idealism, and the few that accomplish that achievement we strive for are just lucky? Point is, you might be putting expectations in the wrong place.

At any rate, in my experience, most people are generally intelligent and can do just about anything they can maintain interest in; that is to say, that if they hit a wall and still want to get through it, they probably are smart enough to do it. If you're smart enough to overcome the mental barriers, and have perseverance because you have true desire in your heart, I think you have a chance at accomplishing something. You might not, but what else are you living for anyway? You won't really know until you give it a shot, and try to break through that wall.

It took me years to muster the courage to try, but I just got accepted from BSc to PhD after a lifetime of failures. I don't really know how IQ plays into it, but I think the biggest barrier for me wasn't optimizing brainpower or believing I was smart enough. It going all-in on something I believed in. Before that, I was nothing. Maybe there are other people like that, too.

Because not everybody wants to be super excepcional celebrity. Most of people want to live relatively simple and anonymous, with only the success enough to have a confortable life.

>>9664514
Also, even ambitious high-iq people in its huge majority dont give a single fuck to iq or Mensa shit

>>9664514
>Because not everybody wants to be super excepcional celebrity.

What the fuck am I reading? Almost everyone does especially mensa members but pretend like they don't want to be when they don't amount to anything. Almost all people want or expect to be famous growing up but when they reach age 20 with a job at a diner or McDonalds they create lies like, "I don't want to be famous anyway". In most cases the only reason people take IQ tests and the mensa test is because of the chance they'll be labelled a genius.

Why did they want to join mensa so badly. It seems like everyone in this thread is dancing around the question. Why aren't at least 30% of the people suggested to be smarter than Einstein, doing something anywhere near the level of Einstein? My "Scam for retards" senses are tingling again.

>>9664140
mensa has a strong incentive to inflate the IQ of insecure people
an intelligent person with self-confidence and ability has little incentive to join
Mensa is subject to very little oversight or test accountability
draw your own conclusions

>>9664140
Because that takes hard work. And because the kind of people who join societies like Mensa or care about their IQ in the first place are generally the type of people least likely to change the world.

simple, mensa isn't compulsory

>>9664140
because that's a statistic you pulled out of your ass and is completely unverified

It seems like most /sci/ users haven't replied to this thread as expected.

The ones who are, are dancing around the question. For the hundreds of children who score 162 every year (some of these stories are on the news). Why has almost none of them ever done anything

>>9664140

>>9664140
Selection bias. Smart people have better ways to spend their time and money on than a yearly subscription to Mensa.

“Intelligence” is a mentalistic construct with as much empirical support as any other cognitivistic explanatory fiction.

Psychology died when Chomsky misunderstood/misrepresented Skinner.

Took IQ test, got above 130 (by a good margin too), and decided not to go into Mensa. I didn't go enter, because I hung out with "high IQ people" before that, and generally noticed that they were dicks.
Essentially, it went on to be an eternal dick-measuring contest. "Oh, you have 137? I have 145..." I don't want that.

If I want to have a dick measuring contest of meaningless numbers, then I'll go play LoL again.

Now I study physics, while most mensa people do absolutely jack shit. Guess who's gonna be a physicist? Not them.

Anyways, I noticed the best "high IQ" people are the ones who don't even know their IQ. The ones at uni, or obviously intelligent people who didnt take the test. Generally, those ppl are pleasant to be around

>>9664493
This

>>9665887
>Why has almost none of them ever done anything
Because IQ tests for kids are extremely inaccurate for scores higher than 130

>>9666461
Okay, what about every adult with a score of 162. Who didn't amount to shit which is 99.99999% of mensans with that score.

>>9666461
t. 130 iq by dankiqtest.wordpress.org

The point is: is there some person which is surely intelligent, like a great mathematician, that has a low IQ? If so, that test is confirmed bullshit

I think IQ tests can measure stupidy but no intelligence

>>9667153
>is there some person which is surely intelligent, like a great mathematician, that has a low IQ?
Nope.

>>9666461
IQ tests have evolved since the early 1900s, anon.

>>9664493
But IQ does predict success.
The question of MENSA is not the same as asking about high-IQ people in general.
Since there are other factors at play than intelligence (e.g. status, discipline, interest), and there is no reason to assume MENSA members are representative of the general high-IQ population in these regards, MENSA members not having great success doesn't generalize easily to the greater population.

most of the people who made the world a better place could get into mensa.

>>9664453
Surw thing jordan peterson. Define succ ess

>>9668878
>Correlation=Causation

Most people who made the world a better place could probably get a high school diploma too, Guess that means I'm at least as smart as Einstein.

>>9664493
>mensa members are smart, but not all accomplished
>this must mean that the link between intrelligence and success is non-existent!
Are you retarded? You are literally extrapolating from a projection that does not match reality.

You will find, by googling on the subject matter, that an above-average IQ is indeed a predictor of academic success and, therefore, of social and economic success.

>>9664497
>IQ tests all seem to be pattern recognition with abstract images. I'm sure there are better measures of intelligence.
Intelligence is literally defined as capacity for abstraction, and the more well-rounded tests (such as the ASVAB, employed by the US armed forces to recognize exceptional talent that may prove useful for advancement to high officer ranks).

>>9664513
>At any rate, in my experience, most people are generally intelligent and can do just about anything they can maintain interest in; that is to say, that if they hit a wall and still want to get through it, they probably are smart enough to do it.
You haven´t actually met any people of sub-average giftedness, have you?

>>9665887
>Why has almost none of them ever done anything
Gifted children vastly outnumber average or dull children in academic, social and economic success.

“Work accomplished on the frontier defines genius, not just getting there. In fact, both accomplishments along the frontier and the final eureka moment are achieved more by entrepreneurship and hard work than by native intelligence. This is so much the case that in most fields most of the time, extreme brightness may be a detriment. It has occurred to me, after meeting so many successful researchers in so many disciplines, that the ideal scientist is smart only to an intermediate degree: bright enough to see what can be done but not so bright as to become bored doing it.“

https://medium.com/@mmeditations/e-o-wilson-on-the-upside-of-introversion-the-limits-of-iq-and-where-ideas-really-come-from-23cface0cd8b

>>9664140
The high iq society should also focus on personality traits and developing personality because they are not going to amount to anything. Iq alone is not enough and may even be destructive beyond certain percentile.

>>9664140
it's basically a set of meaningless quizzes with scores roughly following normal distribution and it measures absolutely nothing concrete. daily reminder that psychology is not a real science

>>9664140
Invention requires both creativity and intelligence.
Mensa members and most scientists are smart but lack creativity.

Having joined Mensa a couple of decades ago for a year and having attended the local meetings, I think much of this is due to Mensa attracting those with high IQ but terrible social skills and various psychological issues. For what it's worth, the founder of Mensa has said he is disappointed that Mensans spend most of their time playing games instead of solving world problems. He seems a bit naive though in regards to Mensans ability to influence policy and gain access to politicians/power brokers.

>>9664513
>chad enthusiasm
>optimism
>new paradigm
>optmism
>new paradigm

How many high-IQ people do you think have joined Mensa? The rarity of 130+ IQ is 1 in 50, so that's a lot of people that haven't joined Mensa.

But yes, you need more than just a high IQ to succeed.

iq is basically useless outside of 100 +- 45

>>9664153
Intelligence is correlated with ambition retard

>>9664140
Because anyone who belongs to MENSA feels no need to prove themselves or contribute intellectually to society. They are too busy circle jerking about a 3 digit number. Revolutionaries are equival parts smart, creative, and ambitious. It takes more than raw brainpower to be one of the great minds of our time.

>>9664140
Women are about as intelligent as men, yet they've done shit all in terms of science, technology or culture throughout history. Lots of reasons why that might be the case. Intelligence isn't the only factor, it's just a prerequisite for most things.

>>9671674
>Women are about as intelligent as men, yet they've done shit all in terms of science, technology or culture throughout history
they aren't as intelligent as men, they just have the same IQ and it only proves that IQ is utter bullshit

>>9664153
>smart but lazy

>>9671693
Yes, it is of course possible to be "smart but lazy." Though people who use the term lazy are frequently morons, whether they use it in an accusatory way or in description of themselves. It reflects a small vocabulary and a lack of intuition on the intricacies of psychology. For example, my post mentioned a few explanations among dozens of hundreds of possibilities and you summarized them as "lazy" because you're an idiot.

>>9671682
The difference is mostly in visuospatial/mathematical, which would handicap them in physics and engineering/inventing stuff, but you'd still expect them to achieve something rather than almost nothing.

>>9671712
Relatively speaking, it's only very recently that women have been allowed to pursue achievement at all. This is obviously a tremendously influential factor.

>>9664140
>be useless person with multiple complexes
>be slightly better than the average at pattern spotting
>PAY to join a club to avoid having your intellectual intelligence prowess being questioned

t. le brainlet

> women are as intelligent as men
There is a study (or multiple) that shows that, at the extreme ends of the bell curve (very stupid, very intelligent), men outnumber women by a significant margin. This might partly explain why most academic achievements are by men. On average, however, I believe the consensus is that IQ differences are very small (1 or 2 points).

>>9671718
Which is what I'm getting at. Just having a decent IQ isn't sufficient to actually achieve anything. You've got to have means, motive and opportunity. If you spend all your spare time doing mensa brain puzzles rather than actually working on solving a real puzzle then you're not motivated to actually achieve something. If you're barred from university you're probably not going to earn enough about any field to make a contribution. etc. etc.

>>9664493
IQ has an extreme coloration with general measures of success.

Sampling Mensa exclusively dosen't necessarily give you a representative sample of high IQ individuals. Even then, you would need to determine a confidence interval and then number of samples needed to form any real option on them.

You also make the assumption all high IQ individuals have taken IQ tests.

t. Statistician

>>9672816
*correlation
fuck phones and this gay earth

Its not a big deal but my mom joined it for the lulz so I did too. But seriously its nice to be catered to as someone who worked hard to realize that level of accomplishment, if you can even call it that. But not all members are pretentious or in love with themselves. I just would never bring up my membership unless its a job application or someone was asking like this thread.

Mensa member here
We use to set up group homo orgies and the guy with the highest IQ would the most coke snorted off his dick

>>9669137
Wow. This has to be the dumbest post in this thread

>>9664140
>>9664153

https://youtu.be/hEUO6pjwFOo

>>9664140
>Realize my IQ is like 117 to 120
>Look at IQ rarity chart

https://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/iqtable.aspx

>Realize in a small band of 150 people roaming a freezing hell-scape you would be guaranteed one of them to be a 137 IQ genius
>Realize how valuable this would be toward collective survival

No wonder the average white IQ is 100.
A person with that kind of brain doesn't need to struggle on their own, but a person at the higher bell-end of such a curve (120-135) can make life easy for everyone.

This makes a lot of sense.

>>9671708
>tfw know some guy that is fucking brilliant
>He's terribly smart, but he's working at Wal-mart and doing little tendy shit

I hate this world.
There was a guy dumber than him that's already in HVAC.

>>9673339
>137
I see what u did there

>>9665887
Children cluster around the middle of the IQ distribution, much more so than adults. The vast majority of children with 120+ IQ scores aren't actually children. They're adults who have time traveled back to their childhood to see how their life would have been different if they "knew then what I know now". As they get older, the advantage of being intellectually an adult in a child's body goes away. Their lives might improve slightly over the one they had in the chronological thread they came from but generally not by much as they make new mistakes in place of the ones the knew to avoid.

>>9673143
FAGSIG?

>>9664140
I think it's because it feels good to have a group of people who are similar to you but im not sure.

>>9664140
last a certain point iq is just a measurement of autism

>>9671674
It's because they don't have to, they are privileged and are the only ones socially capable of acting as leeches, which is comfortable and happy

>>9664140
Because intelligence isn't the sum of your mind or circumstance. It's an important component to anything you do, but obviously not the whole.

>>9664140
Modern leftish philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftish philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e., failed, inferior). The leftist’s feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual’s ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is “inferior” it is not his fault, but society’s, because he has not been brought up properly.

>>9664140
>If IQ is so accurate and intertwined with intelligence in all cases, can someone please explain how 99.9999999999999% of Mensa members never revolutionise science or even contribute anything considerable to the planet
Then why do 99.999999999999999999999999% of people with low IQs not revolutionize science or contribute anything significant? Most people with high IQs not contributing anything doesn't mean that most people who contribute something don't have high IQs. Learn to statistics.

>>9669139
Africa's average IQ

>>9674596
I was taught growing up that people are the result of their parent's teachings, mannerisms, and genetics. Don't know if that is a common belief.

>>9674597

low IQ -> disability/handicap

high IQ "should" be a huge advantage

What threshold is needed to contribute to scientific progress?

Time is a primary factor thus what is the fastest way?

>>9674596
This is unironically 100% true.

>>9674647
Welcome to the nurture vs. nature debate.

>>9674647
>nature vs nurture
I believe in both

>>9676889
meant for>>9676864

>>9676889
But the Earth is flat and evolution is a lie
that would actually be a cool world to live in
And you can speak directly to God

Statistical analysis in all cases show higher IQ is better. The population of people above 125 IQ live longer, achieve more, and commit far less crimes than below 125 IQ.

Using singular examples doesn't prove anything.

Look at the actual data, even when you control for things like SES, environment etc then IQ is still a huge predictor.

It's also important on a societal level. Your life will generally be better being 90 IQ in a 100 IQ environment than 100 IQ in a 90 IQ environment.

>>9676901
Have any experiments been done? I think there are confounding factors here.
Like maybe high IQ people need the low IQ people and a high IQ society would actually be dysfunctional.
Just brainstorming.

>>9676894
The atheist world is the most boring one. ;_;

>>9664140
Intelligence doesn't mean shit without the drive / interest to do something with it, and Mensa jacking off to how smart they are breeds an attitude of complacency and self-assurance rather than inspiration to actually go out and do things.

>>9674537
We have a winner.

It's a social club.
I find it very easy to have interesting conversations within Mensa, for example.
Btw, in 2 years in the club , I have only heard one person mention his i.q., and have seen no one attempt to claim some kind of overall mental superiority to another Mensans. Also, there is a definite oddball/free thinker element for many of us, and a wide spread of social and financial success in the group. However, a very high percentage of Mensans I have met are well paid in intellectually challenging fields, or are professional artists or writers.

>>9676909
I think there is a diminishing return on how many really smart people are in a society. Much of the usefulness of intelligence is, in one way or another, telling others what to do. An overabundance of smart people would mean good potential chiefs not having Indians to lead.

>>9677821
Been a member for a bit over a year. I'm not renewing my sub, fuck these guys (French Mensa here). All they do is stroke their ego and go into pointless debates with each other just for the sake of getting the last word and feeling superior. Asimov was right, but in additon of right wing conservatives, we also have ultra left carebear liberals that throw shit at each other without even trying to understand the other sides' point of view.

Also a good number of retards trying to prove that astrology is a good thing, anti vaxxers, homeopathy fanatics and general nutjobs/attention whores. I even met a guy flaunting that 4chan was the best website ever because "the rekt threads on slash b are sooo funny".

Despicable people all around.

The issue is Mensa is something you have to sign up for, there are factors at play that contribute to someone wanting to be in Mensa besides their intelligence, which means there are plenty of people with high IQ not in Mensa.

If there was a point in your life where you were forced to take an IQ test and all the high scorers were automatically put in Mensa, it would be a better representation of the high IQ population because high IQ would be the ONLY variable in determining membership

>>9664140
>If IQ is so accurate and intertwined with intelligence in all cases
It's not, and literally no research nor any expert or authoritative opinion supports this idea.

>>9671708
>implying you have to have a good vocabulary to be smart

>>9664153
Current mainstream scientific consensus about IQ states that while it is highly precise proxy to intelligence and highly related with success personality traits that are also highly heritable plays more important role in both success and achievement, in other worlds besides intelligence people also needs the right personality to be a genius or to achieve.

>>9672854
>unless its a job application
That's not as good of an idea as you think it is. People who are not members of Mensa tend to despise those who are. Your employer/HR is still a human being, don't forget that.

wonderful, another iq thread. what's the point of having an iq thread every day?

iq is a rough measure of intelligence and problem solving skills. nothing more, nothing less.

>>9664140
Think about it. Mensa accepts 2% of the general population. That's a heck of a lot of people - of course most of them won't revolutionise anything.

why /sci/ feels the need to "set the record straight" on something that's perfectly obvious is beyond me

>>9664204
>They can be born starving in a third world country or into a wealthy household.
But your upbringing influences your IQ, and therefore obviously your intelligence?

>>9667153
>>9667170
Feynman

>>9669137
>social and economic class is a good predictor of IQ
>IQ is a good predictor of social and economic success

>so social and economic class is a good predictor of social and economic success
Waow!

>>9664140
If you look at all of the Nobel prize winners, they all have high IQs. There are no low IQ people who have made major scientific discoveries.

>>9678394
You upbringing DOESN'T influence your IQ though. IQ is 80% heritable. Environment plays almost no part in it.

>>9678422
Get a load of this goof, can you believe this ladies and gentlemen?

>>9664249
>The defining quality of /sci/ is egomania and extreme delusions of grandeur.
made me chuckle

>>9678422
[citation needed]

>>9678431
I don't know what you're trying to prove with that... but I've worked in the human factors field for 10 years now at a consulting firm, specifically cognitive ergonomics... my job is studying this shit... but that doesn't even matter, you don't have to believe that. JUst look it up. Look at meta-studies... for people over 18, IQ is .8 heritable. There have been literally dozens of studies confirming that. It's not even debatable.

>>9678445
https://www.nature.com/articles/mp2014105

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614000099

>>9678447
.8 seems high because muh 80% but you should realize that a 20% difference +/- is very significant and therefore environment is important. Also 80% heritable relative to what? Because if it's IQ value that is significant as fuck that is literally crosses the line between one standard deviation above average and almost being a retard. If it's not IQ value and it's just some undefined value of "percentage of total intelligence" then it's hard to care because it's poorly defined.

>>9678445
"The latent g factor was highly heritable (86%), and accounted for most, but not all, of the genetic effects in specific cognitive domains and elementary cognitive tests."

"he heritability of intelligence increases from about 20% in infancy to perhaps 80% in later adulthood."

>>9664140
Daily reminder that fucking Asia Carrera is a member of Mensa.

There are several studies that have shown that IQ is, at best, a subjective criterion from which to measure any level of accomplishment or intelligence.

Read Gardner's Multiple Intelligences.

>>9678484
That's been debunked many times over. At the very least... it's an extreme fringe idea that is rejected by the overwhelming majority of the community. It's postmodernist nonsense.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/unique-everybody-else/201311/the-illusory-theory-multiple-intelligences

>>9678484
And there are no "studies" that show anything of the sort. There are armchair hypotheses that assume it, all from Gardner. No basis in reality.

>>9678482
>tested IQ 156
>still does porn
STEM on suicide watch

>>9678501
Also, the related idea that there are different "learning styles" has also been debunked.

https://www.sciencealert.com/here-s-why-the-idea-that-we-each-have-a-learning-style-is-bad-science

>>9678509
Nothing gets me rustled up quite like
>I'm a visual learner
>I'm smart but not book smart
>This can only be understood with a hands-on approach

>>9664249
>This is a very good argument

no it isn't. OP is claiming iq is not a good measure of intelligence because most mensa members are not highly accomplished.

two things wrong with this. accomplishment is not the same as intelligence. you can be intelligent and unaccomplished. second, mensa members are not an unbiased sample of the high iq population. do you ever think that someone is more likely to join mensa BECAUSE they're unaccomplished?

i hope you understand this. i hope you're just trolling.

>>9664249
>You cannot reason with people on this board

but you're right, you can't reason with people on this board. you'll end up blowing your brains out if you try.

>>9678509
Fact is, IQ is one of the most accurate and objectively reliable measurements we have for (g) or intelligence. And the more intelligent you are, the better you tend to do on just about every single type of cognitive-related skill... more musical talent, more artistic talent, more general creativity, mathematical, verbal, common sense, etc... despite the "folk wisdom" that high IQ people may be socially inept... thats also untrue. High IQ is actually correlated with having a larger social group and more reported happiness with your social and economic situation.

>>9678524
Although I must be an outlier on that scale (social contentedness). I think once you get over 140, the IQ/social circle correlation probably stops being accurate.

>>9678513
Yeah. me too.

>>9678524

the iq threads are just anti-darwinist critical theory bullshit. iq isn't the end-all-be-all and shouldn't be the foundation for your self-esteem, but you should always look at things for what they are.

>>9678531
It's like any other physical metric, like height. You shouldn't let it define who you are... but you also should accept that reality of the situation (some people are taller than other people... and you're not going to be in the NBA if you're 5 foot 2)

>>9678524
I'm a Mensa member (scored above 99.9%) and INTP. While I have a good job, I'm a social savage. I don't seek social interaction apart from a few very select people (mainly my gf and my family). However I can integrate very easily in any social group.

Having a HIQ doesn't mean you're intelligent, it just means that you can adapt faster than other people -which is great, don't get me wrong. But saying that high IQ equals world changing individual or brilliant person is outright bullshit.

>>9678540

that being the case, why is iq such a regular topic?

>>9678559
Actually, having a high IQ DOES mean you're intelligent. That's the definition of intelligent.

>>9678560
Because it's /sci/, and it's relevant whether you like it or not. Going with anon's example, >>9678540, if there was a board specifically for basketball I guarantee you a regular thread topic would be "how real is the correlation between height and success in the NBA" with regular arguments like
>height is the best indicator of NBA success and if you don't like it it's because you're short
>height is a factor in success but there are many other determinants that make it more complicated

The only difference is height is a very well defined metric and is easy to visualize while the validity of IQ itself is often debated regardless of whether it correlates with success or not

>>9678564

not sure if your comment is tongue-in-cheek, but i don't think you can score high without high intelligence. it's sufficient condition for determining high intelligence.

imo knowing basic calculus is also a sufficient condition for being "smart". if you do, i consider you intelligent.

>>9678577
>Because it's /sci/, and it's relevant whether you like it or not.

it isn't really. the only reason we're talking about it is race/racism. we can't have a discussion about race without you special ops SJWs swooping in to correct the record.

>>9672816
>You also make the assumption all high IQ individuals have taken IQ tests.
No, I'm making the assumption that all Mensa members have taken IQ tests.

>Sampling Mensa exclusively dosen't necessarily give you a representative sample of high IQ individuals
This makes more sense. I don't really know much about Mensa, but if they have enough members, it could still be significant, but yeah, you're not looking at high IQ people, you're looking at high IQ people who joined Mensa.

>>9678623

the idea of a "high iq club" probably seems a little crass to most high iq people. mensa isn't a good sample.

>>9678621
I don't know what you're talking about, first off my post had no SJW arguments in it, and second there are plenty of discussions about race going on, this thread isn't one of them though

You have to pay an annual fee in order to be a member of Mensa. Maybe many high-IQ people don't want to waste money on a dumb club

>>9678564
Semantics.
Intelligence isn't defined by your ability to think quickly, but rather how you analyze and react to various situations while being able to see the global picture. To put it simple, intelligence is subjective. However, I like to describe it as a combination of culture, objectiveness, wisdom and the ability to quickly adapt.

>>9678635
Yeah, now that I'm reading the thread over it just seems the problem isn't IQ, it's Mensa being a second rate establishment. I'm not American, so this was news to me.

>>9678637

i see no other reason for /sci/'s fixation on iq, a subject only tangentially related to science/math.

MENSA is for normies. I'm a Triple Niner bitches. What what.
triplenine.org

>>9678651
And I'm in Mega. Opinion discarded, plebian.

>>9678650
I posted before... my entire field is based on the study of IQ and related metrics. I work in human factors and cognitive ergonomics.

Also, it's not a political issue to want to inform people about IQ differences between races. They're dramatic enough that they have major effects on society. For example, black American have an average IQ one full standard deviation below white Americans (85 vs 100). That has serious implications that are actively ignored by people

>>9678649

mensa hardly seems relevant or worthy of discussion in the first place. it's not like they're a big political group or anything. who cares if some 130+ iq people want to form a circle jerk? what's it to you or anyone else on this board?

>>9678654
The Mega society is nonsense. Saying you have a one in a million IQ is like saying you've measured your height to the exact femtometer. It's impossible.

>>9678673
I mean, it's unlikely but there are over 7 billion people on this earth, how is a one in a million IQ impossible?

>>9678659
>Also, it's not a political issue to want to inform people about IQ differences between races.

/sci/ seems more concerned with discrediting iq as a valid metric, and preventing/monitoring any "out-of-line" discussion

>>9678685
lmao are you alluding to some COINTELPRO-tier nonsense?

>>9678683
Because IQ tests work by comparing scores. They aren't accurate over a certain level. Pretty much any IQ over 160 is a crap shoot. Thats why when you hear people say shit like "I have a 180 IQ" or whatever... it's a lie. IQ tests, reliable ones at least, will give a max score of 160+.

>>9678691
Fair enough, but assuming a true, 100% accurate IQ test COULD exist, then there also must exist someone who could score above 160 on it, right?

>>9678688

yes, that's what i'm alluding to, but also data collection. these discussions are collected and used to model/detect verboten ideas and speech on more popular social media platforms like twitter. at least, that would be my guess.

>>9678673
Careful with those goalposts, anon. You might injure yourself by moving them that much.

4chan has such a schizophrenic feel to it that i really can't see any objective other than drowning out real discussion and perhaps collecting some data.

so yes, i believe it's chiefly a counterintelligence operation

>>9678685
The irony is... I know people in the academic world (working for universities) who are the same way (think IQ is subjective). But I work in the human factors field... and literally everyone I know, and all the data I work with... all says the opposite. In fact, one of the clients I worked for (I work for a consulting company, we get hired by various companies periodically) wanted us to study how "urban" populations (blacks and hispanics) interact with their product differently than white populations. We did, and the results were dramatic. There is so much private sector info about racial differences that would blow peoples minds if they heard about it.

>>9678696
Yeah, there definitely is a population with "Mega society" level IQs... but its measuring those IQs that is the problem.

>>9678709
lmao but this hinges on the assumption that the people who post here are SO resourceful that powerful governements are willing to spend time, money, and human resources to keep us from reaching our full potential and exposing some truth

>>9678710
>There is so much private sector info about racial differences that would blow peoples minds if they heard about it.

not surprising at all. it's pretty much common sense.

i doubt your motives because critical theory is rarely mentioned here. why beat around the bush? isn't critical theory the reason why so many people in the academic world are more concerned with social activism than academics?

>>9678722

the other possibility, that 4chan is being used as a media outlet, seems a little less likely. from what i can see, there aren't actually THAT many visitors, and there is a pretty low signal-to-noise ratio in the first place. it will grow stale to anyone who browses for more than a couple days, with all these threads on repeat. what's someone supposed to come away from this place with?

>>9678710
Most of it isn't correlated by IQ though, but by local and social culture. That's also why you get discrepancies between rich and poor areas. High and easily accessible education makes a fuckhuge difference is consumer behaviour.

>>9678710

or perhaps you have a vested interest in preventing public research into these matters, since it's your bread and butter.

>>9678737
It tends to be the people who lurk the least that complain about thread repetition because they come twice, five days apart, see one repeat thread and throw up their arms and go "fucking /sci/!", but if you spend a decent amount of time here there's a lot of variety in between the common topics and shitposting.

>>9678725
> isn't critical theory the reason why so many people in the academic world are more concerned with social activism than academics?
How the fuck would that be the reason?

>>9678773

"the culture of critique" makes a convincing case. see chapters 2 and 5.

>>9678753
cont.

this actually seems likely. there's undoubtedly a lot of money in it, and academia certainly isn't immune to the influence of private interests.

heh, bingo.

>>9678783
>a convincing case
if you're a neo-nazi and therefore your IQ is between 50 and 70*

>>9664140
>Its almost like its a retarded scam to make people feel good about themselves and see themselves as superior to others.

Yes, congratulations. You passed the real intelligence test.

>>9678710
>In fact, one of the clients I worked for (I work for a consulting company, we get hired by various companies periodically) wanted us to study how "urban" populations (blacks and hispanics) interact with their product differently than white populations. We did, and the results were dramatic.

This is basic target demographic stuff.... You could say the same for men/women, young/old, rich/poor, etc.

>>9678812

aside from perhaps the ADL, most regard it as a legitimate scholarly work .

>>9678705
>>9678709

And organizations like Mensa could have the very same purpose. To map up a certain portion of the population with very inflated ego.

>>9678821
There isn't a single person alive with a valid opinion that considers it a legitimate scholarly work. Far right cultists aren't human, let alone are any of their beliefs legitimate.

>>9678821
The "criticism" section on the wikipedia article is quite extensive.

>>9678826
>having opinions disqualifies your value as a human

wow I think I spotted the real fundamentalist

>>9678831
>(((wikipedia)))

you don't say?

>>9664140
Mensa is a honeypot for intelligent goyim.

Dead give away? The globe over the cube in the logo.

preventing public interest and research into these matters is part of this, that i am certain of. that's why "diversity" and political correctness are shilled in academia. there's nothing academic about critical theory, but critical theory has taken over the social sciences.

>>9678833
Spit in however you want, you are both extremely unintelligent and extremely evil.

>>9678856

what seems like benevolent activism is really a ruse to suppress public research

>>9678858

who? i'm not >>9678833

but >>9678821

who's evil and why?

>>9678858
I am trying to be as unintelligent I can. My parents employers deserve no better.

>>9678815
Its far more in depth than that. "Urban" populations can't understand normal menus for some of our clients, so we had to "redesign" them... which is code for "lower to a 3rd grade reading level".

>>9678856
>>9678831
>>9678826
>>9678821
You want to understand "critical theory"? Read Alan Sokal's "Fashionable Nonsense"... or at least read Richard Dawkin's review of it, an essay titled "Postmodernism Disrobed"
http://www.physics.nyu.edu/sokal/dawkins.html

>>9678890

i'll look into them, but i'm really just interested in understanding why PC nonsense is shilled so heavily at my university and in the media, when it's obviously going to have serious long-term consequences. why am i being slowly marginalized? those are the questions for which i seek answers.

>>9678783
https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/04/16/analyzing-kevin-macdonalds-culture-of-critique-and-the-alt-rights-embrace-of-anti-jewish-ideology/

This guy demolishes your brainlet propaganda

>>9678912
>alt-rights

come on. as if i'm going to take any post-2016 political analysis seriously...

>>9678886

this is exactly the sort of research universities rather than private companies should be doing.

>>9678919
He's analyzing the book you fucking moron. How does it matter what he calls the movement of neo-nazi vermin in the US?

>>9678886
Some white dude from bumblefuck isn't gonna understand what foie gras encapsulated by hydroponic creme fraiche is either. But you won't find that dude in a city that often so you don't need to test that demographic.

>>9664140
IQ scores become inaccurate at the genius stages

>>9678899

I can give you an answer from actual experience, from the horses mouth. I'm getting my PhD now, but I got my masters about 10 years ago and have worked in my field for that long... people in academia KNOW the truth about things like racial differences in IQ... but they have opinions like (and this is from an assistant professor who said this out in the open right to me back when I was getting my masters)... to paraphrase:
"If those facts became common knowledge, it would do far more harm than good. Racists would use them as fuel and justification for their ideas. There is no benefit from accepting them as reality. Protecting society is far more important, and thats the real job of intellectuals."

So basically, he was saying "fuck the truth, I don't like it, so I'll pretend like it's wrong".
This is a common belief in academia.

>>9678925
>neo-nazi vermin in the US?

do you take me for a fool? there are no "neo-nazi vermin". just white voters who felt disenfranchised and got pulled aboard the hype train. fucker.

>>9678931
>If those facts became common knowledge

they ARE common knowledge, everyone already knows this. "racists" already know it, SJWs already know it. most people already know it. race and iq are only a small part of it. the problem is that white people feel so guilty they don't look out for themselves or place any value on their own culture.

>>9678931
Stephen Pinker talked about this same issue. There is a population of intelligent white males who are realizing that much of what they're told in school and university is flat out wrong. They're doing their own research... and the only people who are accepting those truths are often alt-righters or racists. That sucks. Because those people are wrong too, at the other extreme. SO by trying to protect society from the truth, the intellectuals in academia are actually pushing more people toward white nationalism. If they would simply accept reality and teach facts... we'd have a normal society where intelligent people didn't feel like the only people who understand reality are neo-nazis.

>>9678926
>Some white dude from bumblefuck isn't gonna understand what foie gras

he probably does because he's likely the one who has to force feed the geese every day to make it.

>>9678945
Racists hate truth and facts. They pretend to place value on truth when it's conducive to their narrative. Point out a fact they don't like and suddenly their response is to call you Jewish or "libtard." For example, shift the discussion on IQ from race to religion or race to political beliefs, and suddenly IQ is a conspiracy. Should schools also teach that Christians are far less intelligent than atheists on average? I'm guessing that's where you become triggered and, magically, facts aren't so important.

>>9678971
>Should schools also teach that Christians are far less intelligent than atheists on average?

christians don't commit disproportionate amounts of crime, abuse public programs, or benefit from diversity quotas, to name a few things.

>>9678993

but none of that would even bother me if all the propaganda didn't have undertones of white shame and guilt.

>>9678993
They suppressed stem cell research, which is orders of magnitudes worse than everything you mentioned combined.

>>9678993
Then you admit there's more to it than intelligence. We are in agreement.

>>9678997

christians, or representatives of big pharma calling themselves christian?

the latter seems more likely desu

>>9678971
But I'm an atheist too.

>>9679003
So this is what being on Russia's payroll looks like.

No it is literally Christians with religious objections, it has nothing to do with muh big pharma.

>>9678999

of course. also see >>9678996

white ethnic self-interest, or lack thereof, is more concerning than blacks behaving the way they do

>>9679014
Ethnic self-interest should be eradicated for all groups. Humanity has virtually no chance of surviving in the long term while people like you are common. Humanity will either become a species of individualists or destroy itself with sheer stupidity.

>>9679023
>Ethnic self-interest should be eradicated for all groups.

i'd rather not be an early adopter.

>>9679023
Not going to happen until we find xenos to hate, for now we'll have to practice our hate on each other

>>9679045

ethnic self interest is not hate. and if it is, whites are the least hateful people on the planet right now

>>9679023
>while people like you are common

lol, what the fuck man?

"how will we ever survive in the long term with so many critical thinkers around? why can't everyone just buy into our bullshit narrative? why, WHY!??!"

WHY CANT EVERYOEN BE MINDLESS SHEEP WHO JUST BELIEVE EVERYTHING WE TELL THEM. OH THE HUMANITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>9679073
Are you implying that white nationalists are "critical thinkers"? Is that why your movement has no intellectuals and all of its figureheads are comically evil pathological liars manipulating brave internet warriors?

>>9679083

i'm not a white nationalist. i just wish it wasn't taboo for whites to express ethnic self-interest or to value their culture.

>>9679085

and i think many other whites feel the same way. so if some pro-white political movement gains ground, that's what they're going to align themselves with.

>>9679085
The USA just elected a reality TV host president purely due to ethnic self-interested... How is that a taboo? I think where you're confused is that people who champion the "self-interest" of whites are often evil. It's no one else's fault that your loudest proponents are literal nazi shills.

>>9679092
>It's no one else's fault that your loudest proponents are literal nazi shills.

ever notice how the loudest proponents of anything other than the status quo tend to make their cause look bad? really makes you think.

>>9679085
White people already dominate western society. Fighting for "ethnic self-interest" in that case means making sure white people stay in charge. That's called systematic oppression my dude.

>>9679111
>White people already dominate western society

bull. shit. look at the media, look at academia, look at the changing demographics. what's it going to take to get you to see the writing on the wall?


>means making sure white people stay in charge
you mean like literally every other ethnic group in their respective nations? everyone does this. if we don't, we will not be competitive and will likely lose sovereignty over our own nation.

if whites do not retain the ethnic majority and stay in charge, things will go south very fast.

mind if i ask, are you white?

>>9664140
Genuises who change the world are higher above Mensa members than Mensa members are above you.

another day pissed away thinking about this petty drivel. SJWs really do take the joy out of living.

what do you think will happen when whites are a minority in america? you think it will be some kind of diverse utopian paradise? you think it will be better than it is now? that more people will have more opportunities? no, it will be a corrupt hellhole, like damned near every nonwhite or non-asian country.

>>9679184
>non-asian

*non east-asian

>>9679085

Last time I checked whites can still easily publically wank themselves off in a number of avenues such as tech, philosophy, the arts, music, wilderness travels and such.

The problem is some of you view the fact that others can occupy the same space (or being encouraged to) as some inherent inhibitor to ethnic self-interest. When in truth it's about acknowledgement and mutual respect. If you want to continue being paranoid about about it then you're free to do so. Though I think it would be better if you do something more productive or least mentally healthy with your time (obviously pot calling the kettle black here) then posting in a week old troll thread about Mensa.

>>9679122
>look at the media, look at academia, look at the changing demographics. what's it going to take to get you to see the writing on the wall?
Political representation that reflects the demographics of the population. Not that hard.
>you mean like literally every other ethnic group in their respective nations? everyone does this.
Don't care. I lead by example, I don't follow what 3rd world shitholes do.
>if we don't, we will not be competitive
Why wouldn't we be competitive?
>and will likely lose sovereignty over our own nation.
What does that mean? How is a place like America "our own nation" to white people?

>>9679143
>mind if i ask, are you white?
I am. If I was a minority, what difference would it make? As long I get equal opportunity and representation.

>>9679122
>look at the media, look at academia, look at the changing demographics.
How about political representation that reflects the demographics of the population? Not that hard.
>you mean like literally every other ethnic group in their respective nations? everyone does this.
Don't care. I lead by example, I don't follow what 3rd world shitholes do.
>if we don't, we will not be competitive
Why wouldn't we be competitive?
>and will likely lose sovereignty over our own nation.
What does that mean? How is a place like America "our own nation" to white people?

>>9679143
>mind if i ask, are you white?
I am. If I was a minority, what difference would it make? As long I get equal opportunity and representation.

>>9679247
>What does that mean? How is a place like America "our own nation" to white people?

is there a white ethnostate i can move to? because you can find an ethnostate for everyone else.

>>9679297
I lead by example. But go try to make your ethnostate in Europe please, because whites have no stake to claim in the Americas.

Also, historically, most ethnostates eradicated members of the same "race" by current categorizations. A German going to Norway to start a "white ethnostate" for instance makes no goddam sense.

>>9678648
IQ tests measure "how you analyze and react to various situations while being able to see the global picture". Look up "Intelligence: KNowns and UNknowns" or "Mainstream Science of Intelligence". Both are American Psychological Association published papers that explain how you're wrong.

>>9679317
>But go try to make your ethnostate in Europe please

i gladly would but the capital of the old country is run by a man named sadiq, and the other old country is getting mobbed by syrian refugees.

>>9678746
Statistical analysis. It's all controlled for. You can measure the affect of rich vs poor in relation to black vs white with super high accuracy. This is my problem with "folk wisdom" people... they don't understand how actual science is done... and then they complain with ridiculous objections that make no sense with respect to actual scientific methods.

everyone else has somewhere they can fuck off to. we're getting mobbed on all fronts.

white countries have money. it's an all-you-can-eat buffet until whites put their foot down or we become the minority and are voted out.

this lack of ethnic self-interest WILL kill us. i have no doubt about that.

it's incredibly disappointing that you refuse to acknowlege this.

>>9679346
>white countries have money. it's an all-you-can-eat buffet until whites put their foot down or we become the minority and are voted out.
>>9679346
>white countries have money. it's an all-you-can-eat buffet until whites put their foot down or we become the minority and are voted out.
>>9679346
>white countries have money. it's an all-you-can-eat buffet until whites put their foot down or we become the minority and are voted out.
>>9679346
>white countries have money. it's an all-you-can-eat buffet until whites put their foot down or we become the minority and are voted out.
>>9679346
>white countries have money. it's an all-you-can-eat buffet until whites put their foot down or we become the minority and are voted out.

I'm thinking about joining and convincing them to give me money for undergrad research