iq < 100

[Anonymous No.11215730]

Hey kids, it's that iq thread again.

> I got 91, official.
Anyone got around that score and succeeded in decent white collar career ?

p.s. Since some of your aren't aware - internet tests don't count.

[Anonymous No.11215743]

>>11215730
158 IQ reporting. Still in school though, I'm gonna hand out my CV in the next few days though.

[Anonymous No.11215757]

>>11215730
What's your favourite sport?

[Anonymous No.11215760]

>>11215730
Shit son, you're 10 points below the realising that IQ is bullshit line. Guess you're doomed, good luck

[Anonymous No.11215777]

85 iq here it is awful

[Anonymous No.11215815]

As a tourist to this board it always shocks me that the SCIENCE board is the most obsessed with a tool from a field which is essentially a pseudo-science

[Anonymous No.11215817]

>>11215815
It might need to actually measure intelligence but higher IQs typically make more money and have better lives. So it's measuring something that leads to positive outcomes.

[Anonymous No.11215828]

>another IQ thread

[Anonymous No.11215831]

>>11215815
IQ may not be completely "valid", but it is highly replicable with proper instruments.

[Anonymous No.11215832]

>>11215815
stormfag shills pushing their racialist agenda.

[Anonymous No.11215834]

>Get force tested for ADD back in highschool cause parents know I'm fucking retarded and fail basic mafs
>Part of the test is an IQ score
>Shink comes back and slams me with 90
>Feelsbrainletman
>Says I have a bad case of zoomer-itis
>Don't take the pills cause they make me depressed
>Try to study comp sci in college
>Fail 2/5 intro classes cause they are too hard
>Drop into statistics cause it's easier
>Sperg my way into a few internships by reading how to crack the coding interview
>Graduate with 7 failed classes and just under a 3.0
>Just signed with a big tech company with 6 figure salary and noodle caboodle and toaster strudel amounts of sigining bonus and stonks

Computer Science Is A Fucking Joke

[Anonymous No.11215848]

>>11215817
You know what also correlates to making more money and having better lives?
Having rich parents. Also seems a lot more convenient to measure

[Anonymous No.11215853]

>>11215730
Scored a 127 on some IQ test someone posted here.

Sounds about right, desu. Considering my lack of any substantial accomplishments, being a midwit seems to make sense.

[Anonymous No.11215874]

>>11215730
How do you even get a free non-internet test?

[Anonymous No.11215881]

>>11215815
based
>>11215832
this is true. /pol comes to this board pretty often and shitpoast it up with heavy emphasis on Iq thread and denying climate change threads. Not /sci posters, their literally /pol posters coming to /sci to further promote their lack of education on the internet.

[Anonymous No.11215915]

>>11215815
I agree the petty obsession here is pathetic but to call IQ pseudo science because it clashes with your agenda is even more pathetic.
IQ is the best predictor for success that humans have and there is nothing arbitrary about the method.

[Anonymous No.11215918]

>>11215848
IQ is hereditary.

[Anonymous No.11215960]

>I got 91, official
>internet tests don't count
So, this is the people who think internet tests aren't valid

[Anonymous No.11215977]

>>11215915
>because it clashes with your agenda
Seems more like you're the one with an agenda here. I'm just stating that psychology isn't a real science

[Anonymous No.11215980]

>>11215918
So is wealth

[Anonymous No.11216003]

Dear anons, im sure you all got 140+ in all the test you'v done that you have found god know where. Your all super awesome and all that.

But the thread was intentionally was made as a discussion about chances of "making it" while being ~90.

[Anonymous No.11216044]

>>11215815
It's one of the best predictor in social sciences, idk where the meme that IQ is bulshit started, but everytime IQ is tested it has high correlation with social outcomes.

[Anonymous No.11216046]

>>11216044
It's not called "social outcomes quotient"

[Anonymous No.11216049]

>>11215815
>baiting this hard
It's just a fact that /sci is overrun by crossboarders

[Anonymous No.11216054]

>>11216046
EQ is meme if you mean that. What's matter is g factor which is best represented by IQ tests.

[Anonymous No.11216058]

>>11215881
Don't forget race's correlation with IQ threads, which boils down to "hurrr me white me smart nigger stupid dumb unga".

[Anonymous No.11216060]

>>11216058
go back

[Anonymous No.11216065]

>>11216054
This is proof of your sub 100 IQ, a measure you are so fond of.

[Anonymous No.11216070]

>>11216058
Except everyone knows that East Asians have higher IQ than Whites, and Ashkenazi Jews have the highest one. Which is reflected in both academics success and criminal rates.
>>11216065
In what way? You can go around insulting others but that's not really how discussion works. IQ is the best predictor, that's it. Doesn't mean your life is bound to it, it just means it is good at making predictions.
I will make simple example for you, just because you smoke doesn't mean you will get cancer, but is likely, just because you don't doesn't mean you won't get, but it's less likely. The same is with IQ, just because you have high IQ doesn't mean you will success, low IQ doesn't also mean you will fail at life.
It's not single predict it all factor, but it's one that predicts a lot of things fairly good.

[Anonymous No.11216082]

>>11216054
>g factor which is best represented by IQ tests
Wanna know how I know that you have no proof for this statement?

[Anonymous No.11216099]

>>11216070

>Which is reflected in both academics success and criminal rates.

Not him but I might believe this for Ashkenazi Jews but East Asians are debatable. Mostly because their academic success stems mostly from sacrificing their social life and spending +14 hrs a day in school. At that point of course you're going to have a higher average of academic success than others since you are spending more time at school than home.

Hell if most people were willing to sacrifice the majority of their social life and just exclusively do school/work they can easily become more successful than the current average regardless of race or IQ.

[Anonymous No.11216113]

>>11216082
Well, maybe because it's specifically designed to measure g factor? Sure, there will be variation in "IQ" value.
INB4 cultural differences, IQ test are designed in a way that you shouldn't be able to study to them, nor there is proof that any cultural background helps affect outcomes.
It's theorized that it's the case solely on the basis that all ethnicities have to have equal average results, which is stupid.

>>11216099
Well, supposedly East Asian IQ has narrower distribution that Whites, that's why they have higher average IQ but less "geniuses'. Cultural differences and other factors may explain rest.

[Anonymous No.11216116]

>>11216113
>it's specifically designed to measure g factor
And based off this information alone you think that makes IQ an accurate means of measuring intelligence?
You're not one for scientific rigour are you?

[Anonymous No.11216150]

>>11216116
Because it works great as predictor? Populations with higher average IQ have less crime, people with higher IQ tend to do better at life. It's doing quite well for what is it designed.
It's like saying that measuring blood pressure is not accurate means of measuring cardiovascular health, sure it's not know it all, but it can tell you in what overall shape you are without going into more detail.

[Anonymous No.11216180]

>>11216150
You bring up a good point but your argument is flawed.
The correlation between blood pressure and cardiovascular disease is well studied and backed by numerous meta analysis studies.
With your statement I'm assuming you're saying crime and quality of life are related to intelligence, and therefore IQ is good at measuring these because IQ is good at measuring intelligence.
But the problem with that statement is that none of these correlations have been demonstrated with the same body of scientific evidence. It's all conjecture.

[Anonymous No.11216192]

>>11216180
>>11216116
>You're not one for scientific rigour are you?

I'm assuming you've read Jensen's g factor, right? It's a pretty rigorous tome - what specifically do you find lacking?

[Anonymous No.11216208]

>>11216070
>IQ is the best predictor
>it just means it is good at making predictions
even if we take you at your word (really, wealth is a better predictor of success), "best" doesn't imply "good" in the first place

some fucking guys in sub saharan africa invented a spaceship to go to the moon, it was specifically designed to go to the moon, and it was the very best they had.
guess what? it was still shit.
that's what IQ is like. designed for the job, supposedly the best we have... and still shit.

>>11216150
being short is correlated with type 2 diabetes risk, i guess your doctor can get a general idea of your type 2 diabetes risk by measuring your height?

[Anonymous No.11216222]

I’m 130 and more retarded than 70% of people I meet

[Anonymous No.11216232]

People have different mental capabilities from one another. IQ tests are the best method for defining this.
There shouldn't be any controversy over it. People have different abilities.

[Anonymous No.11216238]

>>11216192
so
books > peer review ?

[Anonymous No.11216273]

>>11216192

They probably have an issue with the lack of tangiblility concerning IQ. For instance blood pressure and cardiovascular disease are both tangible attributes that can be physically observed, measured and correlated to each other. On the other hand IQ doesn't have this tangiblility, yes you can show statistical evidence for its existence by devising numerous battery tests for sample populations but that's still not physically correlating IQ to a tangible attribute.

There have been many proposals for the physical proof associated with IQ such as brain size, neural density, cortical density, grey matter or specific genes but nothing definitive yet. It also doesn't help that there is still no true assessment of what intelligence and for that matter consciousness actually is either. In truth the belief in IQ being legitimate is a "cart before the horse" scenario, instead of trying to definitively answer what intelligence/ consciousness is first we've jumped ahead to figuring out what the minimum and maximum parameters for it are.

We've already seen what happens when you jump to focusing on the parameters without figuring out what the subject truly is. The mirror test incident with several species of ants and a 5cm fish being proven as "self-aware" showed this. Now the psychometrics community are torn as to how to proceed with self-awareness testing.

[Anonymous No.11216306]

I know plenty of idiots that are creative in brilliant ways.

[Anonymous No.11216310]

>>11215730

[Anonymous No.11216315]

>>11216273

how is cardiovascular disease a tangible attribute?

[Anonymous No.11216457]

>>11215730
Still within a standard deviation so you're pretty good. Intelligence matters but if you put 10 years into something you'll be an expert.

[Anonymous No.11216469]

>>11216315

Because we can monitor and interact with each step of the process involving a healthy heart physically being altered to a diseased heart with medical tools. Since each step of the process is associated with irregular behavior that is counter-intuitive to normal efficient heart function. We can use tools to physically touch and measure the features that lead to cardiovascular disease.

[Anonymous No.11216566]

>>11216208
Yes, that's exactly this. IQ is good at making predictions, it was designed to measure g factor, That's how science works, we create hypothesis and test it, IQ was designed as g factor predictor and was tested against reality, that's the point.
Idk about diabetes, but IQ works no mater if you like this or not.

>>11216180
IQ is also backed by many studies, it gives results, that's the entire point. We don't understand gravity, yet we know mass attracts mass. Observing something and testing it over and over again doesn't require you to get mechanical explanation.

I think I understand why there is so much denial about this, social implications of IQ are quite severe, but reality is what it is. Back in high school, and middle school, I did know kids who would study for hours, yet never be able to success to truly grasps topics at school. On the other hand there were kids who wouldn't study, who wouldn't study, who would go straight to video games after school or would party all time, yet still be able to get good grades.
Sure studying is important, but different humans have different capabilities. I don't think it's that controversial, one of those differences is intelligence. When did existence of IQ as valid measurement been debunked. Few years ago discussion was pretty much only about of how much is heritable and how much is environmental or cultural. Is it because no one was able to prove that IQ variance between ethnic groups aren't manly genetics.

It would be really nice to tell everyone, just study and you will get as far as you want, but I think anyone who had any kind of social interactions will know that it's not only about working hard, and we need to recognize that there are people who are genuinely trying and them failing is not their fault, and not fault of other people who are supposedly oppressing them.

[Anonymous No.11216611]

>>11216566
>IQ is also backed by many studies
Find me 1 (one) high quality study demonstrating that IQ is a reliable tool for measuring intelligence

[Anonymous No.11216631]

>>11216060
go back to /pol

[Anonymous No.11216635]

>>11215730
100 iq on the dot masterrace reporting in

it's good to be on top

[Anonymous No.11216642]

>>11215881
>>11216058

Negro detected

[Anonymous No.11216648]

>>11216208

you can get a general idea of your type 2 diabetes by measuring your blood sugar, just like you can measure your risk of failure in life by measuring your iq

[Anonymous No.11216667]

>>11216611
https://www.gwern.net/docs/iq/2007-strenze.pdf

[Anonymous No.11216716]

>>11216667
Well, this one shows that IQ has good correlation with social outcomes. If IQ is heritable then both parental support and parental education might be result of high IQ genes in family, so it kinda proves that IQ is good predictor.

As for:
>>11216611
here,
http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/The-g-factor-of-international-cognitive-ability-comparisons-the-homogeneity-of-results-in-PISA-TIMSS-PIRLS-and-IQ-tests-across-nations.pdf

The most important question is what is intelligence, do you count g factor as intelligence or not. Is job performance and academic results indicative of intelligence? We can doubt everything, but IQ has proven that it works quite well.

[Anonymous No.11216721]

>>11215730
i scored a 94 on an iq test by a professional psychologist. but this is after years of taking antipsychotic medication for my psychiatric problems (schizo affective disorder). prior to me breaking down fully my iq score was around 126

shit sucks.

[Anonymous No.11216737]

>>11216566
>Idk about diabetes, but IQ works no mater if you like this or not.
I think the point is rulers are designed to measure height.
Only an idiot would say rulers are good for measuring type 2 diabetes.

Similarly, IQ is designed to measure intelligence.
You run into trouble when you try to use it to measure social outcomes. Pic related.

[Anonymous No.11216741]

>>11216648
>you can get a general idea of your type 2 diabetes by measuring your blood sugar,
but height is inversely correlated with diabetes risk, anon, why do you need to measure your blood sugar? are you a height-denier?

[Anonymous No.11216745]

>>11216737
Well, if you want to frame it like this.
But I think his idea was that IQ doesn't measure intelligence. I can agree that intelligence is not be all factor of success.
But sure it is one.

[Anonymous No.11216753]

>>11216667
This article only assumes that IQ is an accurate means of determining intelligence, it doesn't prove it at any point.
Do you know how to read a paper?

[Anonymous No.11216757]

>>11215834
You literally have my exact life story, except I stuck with cs

[Anonymous No.11216763]

>>11215834
its not even a joke

[Anonymous No.11216814]

>>11216716
>The most important question is what is intelligence
Exactly. Intelligence is something that is extremely difficult even to understand. Even prominent thinkers that part of psychology can't even come to agreement on a universal definition.
And yet IQ attempts to quantify this, which is absurd.
Like this poster >>11216273 said, trying to measure something before even thoroughly knowing what exactly it is you're trying to measure is a hopeless task.

[Anonymous No.11216856]

>>11215730
What was your SAT score?

[Anonymous No.11216906]

>>11215730
>Tfw have an IQ of 97 and I was able to teach myself calculus, linear algebra, and abstract algebra
How the fuck does this work? I shouldn't be able to do this according to IQ

[Anonymous No.11216910]

>>11215874
School. Especially if an adult suspects that you’re retarded

[Anonymous No.11216960]

I scored 160 in elementary school and now I’m an opiate addict and college drop out

[Anonymous No.11216963]

>>11216814
Not really, there is definition of intelligence that was agreed upon on, it's the ability to recognize patterns. IQ is great at measuring this.
>>11216906
Not all IQ tests are made equal, you could also had worse day while making test, also IQ doesn't dictate what can you do, more like how fast you can do this. It's not that straightforward. Hard work can compensate for intelligence.
That's why IQ predicts better for high skill jobs performance vs jobs that requires to learn once and repeat what you already know, there you diligence is more important.
IQ is tool, it's not perfect but it has it's use cases.

Denying IQ is as bad as fetishizing it.

[Anonymous No.11216966]

>>11216963
>ability to recognise patterns
>intelligence

[Anonymous No.11216973]

>>11216208
>really, wealth is a better predictor of success
Do you have a source for that ?

[Anonymous No.11216979]

>>11216960
I too scored above the 99.9th percentile and became addicted to opiates and dropped out of school.... I'm now returning though, after 5 years of doing fuck all other than getting drunk and high and dying.. I've gotten into a top ranking University to finish my Math degree, starting in January, don't think I remember much from the courses in my first 3 years so I'm nervous AF, but I mean, it was easy enough the first time around I was able to be constantly drunk and high it probably will be a breeze to learn it again when I need it while sober..

[Anonymous No.11216981]

>>11215834
gives me hope

[Anonymous No.11216988]

>>11216979
wtf are you me

[Anonymous No.11216990]

>>11216966
You probably think that intelligence is magic dust sprinkled by god.
"ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills" is fancy sentence for pattern recognition, there is no way around it.

[Anonymous No.11216995]

>>11216990
>intelligence is this because I said so
Yeah look if you make the definition of intelligence fit IQ then sure IQ is valid, the world doesn't work like that though

[Anonymous No.11216999]

>>11216979
I probably won’t make it back to school. Right now I’m a car salesman and I make enough to live off of. I have enough time off to enjoy vacations and creative endeavors. When and if I do quit painkillers, my plan is to leave my day job and pursue my artwork/travel full time.

[Anonymous No.11217001]

>>11216995
It was agreed upon this earlier. Ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skill is definition of intelligence. Duh, even "emotional" intelligence follows definition of pattern recognition in behavior instead of analytic skills.

[Anonymous No.11217006]

>>11216966
high IQ was always about making quick connections to the knowledge you possess based on the stimulus you get from the world.
also the amount of connections changes with IQ.
I've been tutoring a person with legit mental problems (lower than normal IQ). I always feel like at first glance the things in front of that person do not induce any mental problems. and if you make that person focus for long enough, only basic conclusions emerge.
people with low IQ need plenty of time to process things, like a lag or something. the second thing is how they use their knowledge to address problems - in case of low IQ they just form very shallow connections with the things they know.

[Anonymous No.11217009]

>>11216208
wealth is a significantly worse predictor of success than IQ

[Anonymous No.11217010]

>>11216208
>>11217009

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/03/120329142035.htm

This is just the first thing that came up on google, you will find dozens of studies just like it if you look.

[Anonymous No.11217013]

>>11216999
different anon in a very similar spot as I also got addicted to opiates and am returning to school, methadone worked well for me, as well as moving from the city where my drug of choice was readily available.. I was using about 270mg of hydromorph a day as well as drinking a quart of liquor. trying to finish my degree but honestly after everything I think I'd be pretty happy just making enough to have time for/enjoy my creative endeavours as well so long as I can find something to actually challenge me in my day-to-day life, currently I've just been putting myself in life threatening situations, but I'm looking forward to getting back to my maths as it's probably healthier (and more challenging).

[Anonymous No.11217014]

>>11216995
>words don't have inherent meanings so all definitions are arbitrary and thus all concepts are invalid
Wew

[Anonymous No.11217018]

>>11217013
Yes, I’m actually glad I went sales route. It’s like an endless game of poker

[Anonymous No.11217020]

>>11217009
> low IQ but huge personality or some weird talent = quite likely success
> high IQ but shut in personality = high chance of failure
> high IQ and a good personality = certain success

[Anonymous No.11217021]

>>11217014
So this is the power of IQ apologists

[Anonymous No.11217029]

>>11217020
Oh mate, p e r s o n a l i t y is much worse defined than intelligence, you are sailing on very dangerous waters.

[Anonymous No.11217030]

>>11217018
Hmm. Thanks for sharing anon, might be a good consideration if my current plans don't work out.

[Anonymous No.11217031]

>>11217021

[Anonymous No.11217038]

I'd like a legitimate way to test my IQ. Where should I go to do something like this?

[Anonymous No.11217039]

>>11217029
basically in this context a good personality is a personality which allows you to easily cooperate with or manage people. this is crucial

[Anonymous No.11217045]

>>11217038
A psychiatrist

[Anonymous No.11217047]

>>11217029
still quite well defined tho. maybe not to the same level of statistical success as IQ, but pretty close.

[Anonymous No.11217054]

>>11216044
it comes from liberals wanting to blame the lack of success for everyone that isn't successful on their societal oppression unless of course they're white poor and dumb in which case it's because they're racist (even if they're not)

[Anonymous No.11217819]

>>11215730
>04
i have an iq of infinity

[Anonymous No.11217846]

>>11216003
Stop pretending to be retarded

[Anonymous No.11217855]

I got an IQ of 60, I believe in aliens, browse /pol/ and /x/, keep spamming threads about consciousness and keep asking how to know if anything is real because I did too many drugs and went insane.

[Anonymous No.11217901]

>>11215730
36 IQ here I like cake

[Anonymous No.11217948]

>>11215730
6,000,000 IQ here, you should enlist in the US military and fight wars for Israel

[Anonymous No.11217980]

>>11216642
pollack detected. go back to /pol

[Anonymous No.11218320]

>>11215848
statistically the results are quite robust
IQ correlates to lifetime success more strongly than the SES of your parents.
also the heritability of IQ is over 60% so the intelligence of your parents is strongly correlated to the SES they were able to provide for you to grow up in.

[Anonymous No.11218323]

>>11215980
IQ is more heritable than wealth.

[Anonymous No.11218328]

>>11215730
you more than likely have a quite functional life

[Anonymous No.11218335]

>>11215834
based af

[Anonymous No.11218336]

>>11218323
Low iq is the gift that keeps on giving

[Anonymous No.11218342]

>>11218336
please refute him if it's pseudo-science, I seriously want to know why.
t. pic related. I have no fucking idea how you came to your conclusions.

[Anonymous No.11218343]

>>11218336
it certainly pays in welfare cheques.

[Anonymous No.11218363]

>>11216635
Big fish in a small pond

[Anonymous No.11218364]

>>11218343
This, western nations are creating environment that selects for low IQ individuals. People who aren't fit to be parents are rewarded for being parents via welfare, making their tendency to have a lot of kids even more severe. High IQ people on the other hand are severely taxed , and those are people who are more cautious when it come to reproduction, making them even less likely to have kids.
In the long run it will create even less intelligent population.
Welfare is cancer of society.

[Anonymous No.11218368]

>>11218343
Ignorance is bliss and you cant put a price on happiness have a nice day

[Anonymous No.11218379]

>>11215815
Psychology is not pseudo science, ti actually has a high replicability rate compared to most fields and IQ is one of the most well tested things in the whole discipline. If IQ were BS it would've been abolished a long, long time ago

[Anonymous No.11218397]

>>11218368
Would you mind clarifying your veiled insult.
Are you attempting to present this as if I were the ignorant one?
This is /sci/ you have to occasionally back up your arguments here if you want to be taken seriously,

[Anonymous No.11218401]

>>11215730
some people have an iq of 0, hahahaha. my iq is infinity.

[Anonymous No.11218788]

>>11218379
Psychology has been around for centuries and is still yet to make a universal proven model of how the mind works
Not pseudo science?
>If IQ were BS it would've been abolished a long, long time ago
Then how do you explain all the other pseudo-sciences that are still around? Psychoanalysis is still kicking it harder than ever

[Anonymous No.11218820]

>>11215834
>engineering: 90 IQ requirement
>electrical engineering: 110IQ requirement
>CS: 80IQ requirement
>maffs: minimum requirement of 160
>soft science: 0IQ requirement. (literally a dead body could get a degree in soft sciences, while receiving blowjobs and being the teacher's pet.)

[Anonymous No.11219747]

>>11215730
You should be fine. I'm finishing up grad school and managed a 4.0 in fucking Physics. Top of class.
/sci/ will say work hard and study, but that's not how I did it.
Literally just memorization. Not repetition either, you get that from lab, hw, and lecture. Just focus on memorizing everything as a tool, and put it in your "toolbox" to use for later. I suggest looking up "idiot savant"
My IQ is 95, and was tested almost yearly for the GATE program as a kid.

[Anonymous No.11219761]

>>11215874
we did one in school years ago.

[Anonymous No.11219776]

>>11215874
We did one years ago in school. Ive been quite unsuccessful in life so far.
>>11216856
We didn't have one. My grades were somewhat bellow average. I'm very inconsistent as a person, I constantly slip up in simplest things, forgetting parts of simplest algorithms, constantly mistyping. Specifically I noticed how almost all full sentence I write while gaming, I barely ever do it without typo mistakes. Might be that the case that i need meds to concentrate better.
Anyone takes any?

>>11218328
Thanks mate, your small simple honest advice made me feel :)

[Anonymous No.11219782]

>>11218820
Why is CS that low?

[Anonymous No.11219804]

>>11218820

[Anonymous No.11219815]

>>11219804
Feels good to be Molecular Physicist

[Anonymous No.11219830]

>>11216631
>go back to pol
hey retard you realize you're on the same website as pol is.

[Anonymous No.11219851]

>>11215730
>IQ thread
>plebbit spacing
>91 on test
The absolute state of plebbit teenagers

[Anonymous No.11219862]

>>11216058
>>11216631
Seriously, fuck off back to plebbit. Your retarded, vapid virtue signalling isnt welcome here.

[Anonymous No.11220478]

>>11215815
Most IQ threads on this board are from tourists coming from /pol/. I know this because I'm one of them. But you won't be able to tell when I'm in another thread, so I don't mind admitting it.

[Anonymous No.11220525]

>>11215828
based