not being the highest-IQ person in the room

[Anonymous No.15053002]

anyone else fucking hate this feeling? i get exremly anxiety and demoralized to the point of shutting down when there is a person smarter than me in my vicinity

[Anonymous No.15053007]

>>15053002
I've never had to experience that feeling, because I have no problems convincing myself that I'm always the smartest person in the room.
What's stopping you from convincing yourself of the same thing? There are probably tons of copes/outs that you're overlooking.

[Anonymous No.15053013]

>>15053002
You should be grateful for that instead.
If you're the smartest person in the room it's time to change room.

[Anonymous No.15053032]

I only feel demoralized when I'm in a room with some arrogant faggot who thinks he's better than everyone else

[Anonymous No.15053035]

>>15053013
>If you're the smartest person in the room it's time to change room.
only smart people recognize this because of how lonely it is at the top

[Anonymous No.15053036]

>>15053035
Yeah. Loneliness is a pretty good indicator.

[Anonymous No.15053042]

>>15053002
Do you suck large African penises by any chance? Because it sounds like you suck large African penises

[Anonymous No.15053049]

Honest advice anon, stop clinging to intelligence as any kind of superiority over people. Being humbled by people out of your league is an inevitability.

[Anonymous No.15053090]

>>15053036
Kek that's not what he meant. Midwit

[Anonymous No.15053098]

>>15053002
If someone is smarter than you that is an opportunity to steal their knowledge. Embrace your stupidity

[Anonymous No.15055141]

>>15053002
Compensate by improving your other qualities; physical fitness, attractiveness, morality, etc. That's how I cope

[Anonymous No.15055212]

>>15053002
>when there is a person smarter than me in my vicinity
Every person around you is smarter as you in some area. Only idiots regard them-self as "smartest".

[Anonymous No.15055221]

I used to feel insecure about this but the older I get the more I think I'm not smart anyway

[Aether king of sci No.15055222]

I've never had this experience OP so technically you should kys because I posted.

[Jealous No.15055235]

I always admire others' intelligence when it is so high that I notice it. It never threatens me.

[Anonymous No.15055237]

sci n ce
Sounds ard

[Anonymous No.15055264]

This triggers me every time. I feel genuine hatred against the smartest person and urgently have the need to assert my intellectual superiority by challenging their knowledge and their IQ. People called me a sperg and excluded me from social gatherings because of this but I can't stop. It's unbearable not to be the smartest.

[Anonymous No.15055320]

[Anonymous No.15055349]

>>15055264
That type of person pisses me off. You’re supposed to both share your knowledge and acquire new knowledge from each other.

[Anonymous No.15055404]

>>15053090
I meant exactly what he meant. Loneliness despite being in a group. If you're not a midwit yourself you know what it feels like.

[Anonymous No.15055410]

>>15055404
It has nothing to do with how you FEEL. It has everything to do with how you ARE. Geniuses aren't FEELING lonely. They merely recognize they're without a peer. By your midwit emotions, depressed people are the ones who are smarter. Think about it this way. If loneliness equates to ingenuity, and if depression leads to loneliness, and if women are depressed much more than men, then by your reasoning, women are smarter than men on average. This is clearly incorrect. Only a midwit like you could associate EMOTIONS (the sense of FEELING lonely) with being high IQ. upon further reflection you may not even be a midwit. You sound like a retard.

[Anonymous No.15055429]

>>15055410
>Discusses intelligence
>Doesn't understand basic logical implication

[Anonymous No.15055435]

>I wish I could find more intelligent people in this room

[Anonymous No.15055442]

>be onlyfans slut
>reject simps all day
>feel lonely
>therefore, lonely onlyfans sluts are geniuses

[Anonymous No.15055445]

Give me the best questions to estimate someone's IQ without directly asking them to take an IQ test.

[Anonymous No.15055447]

>>15053002
not that I can recall, but my IQ is extremely high (~140, top percentile)
I've probably been in a room with someone having a higher IQ every now and then, but can't really detect it at that point, if anything they'd feel more like a peer

[Anonymous No.15055448]

>>15055442
>implying taking money from simps isn't smart
>implying women can be lonely

[Anonymous No.15055462]

>>15055447
>140
>extremely high
I bet you can't really detect how everyone in the room is laughing at you

[Anonymous No.15055474]

>>15055445
Ask their opinions on the following topics:
>free will
>consciousness
>covid vaccines
>IQ
>Ukraine
>quantum mechanics
>parapsychology
>the trolley problem
To each topic there exists a definite answer objectively indicating high IQ.

[Anonymous No.15055481]

>>15055474
>>free will
wills cost and distribute money. no wills are free.
>>consciousness
ill-defined, and thus moot.
>>covid vaccines
they exist.
>>IQ
pseudoscience.
>>Ukraine
eastern country in europe.
>>quantum mechanics
you don't understand a lick about quantum mechanics, faggot. just solve schrodingers equation.
>>parapsychology
>>>/x/
>>the trolley problem
introduce two trains to hit both sets of targets.

[Anonymous No.15055484]

>>15055481
midwit

[Anonymous No.15055491]

>>15055484
i'd rather be a midwit than a dimwit pseud like you.

[Anonymous No.15055496]

>>15055462
140 is the top percentile when it comes to IQ (SD of 15, of course)
in fact, it's the top half percentile
in other words, for every ~200 people I meet, only a single one of them will have a higher IQ than me, and even then it's most likely to be extremely close to my own

[Anonymous No.15055498]

>>15055496
>top percentile is less than three standard deviations above the mean
moron.

[Anonymous No.15055500]

>>15055498
>>top percentile is less than three standard deviations above the mean
yes, that's correct
with an SD of 15, an IQ of 140 corresponds to a higher IQ than 99.6%of people

[Anonymous No.15055501]

>>15055500
>an SD
lmao

[Anonymous No.15055506]

>>15055501
yes, when pronouncing that abbreviation you pronounce each letter individual, i.e. as "ess dee", making "an" the appropriate indefinite article to use there
>a standard deviation
>an SD

[Anonymous No.15055508]

>>15055506
>pronouncing an abbreviation
midwit

[Anonymous No.15055510]

>>15055508
Pronouncing each word instead of the letters is midwit because the midwit will do they to show they're smart for knowing what it stands for

[Anonymous No.15055511]

>>15055508
that is indeed what's most common for a wide variety of abbreviations
it is after all the entire purpose of abbreviation in the first place
>midwit
well, being in the top 99.6% of people IQ-wise, I'd argue that this would most definitely be a mischaracterization

[Anonymous No.15055514]

>>15055491
Your estimated IQ just decreased.

[Anonymous No.15055522]

>>15055510
>>15055511
nobody pronounces it as "ess-dee". you either say "standard deviation", or when actually discussing it among peers, "sigma". for example, you'd refer to a 140IQ as "2.67-sigma". by the way, IQ tests don't cap at 140 IQ. here's what i've concluded from your posts:
>you're a child (when i say child, i mean at the oldest, in undergraduate)
>you only ever discuss this topic virtually, either online or over discord among randos who have no expertise
>you self fellate yourself so often, you're incapable of understanding how you're wrong even when people tell you how you're wrong
>as such, you've deluded yourself into believing you're a genius without peer
like i said. peak midwit behavior. you've got a lot to learn, kid.

[Anonymous No.15055528]

>>15055522
countless people pronounce it SD, and that is what's most common
when discussing it among peers, i.e. people familiar with statistics, "sigma" is also definitely quite common
seeing as how you were seemingly unaware of what percentile the different SDs cover, I certainly would not assume that you have a very high degree of familiarity with statistics
a good rule you can remember for the future is the 68-95-99.7-rule, which refers to the percentiles covered by each SD

[Anonymous No.15055531]

>>15053002
It's because you're arrogant, learn humility and you'll go far in life, learn to appreciate being the idiot that learns something because of it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkLzo_oNVho

[Anonymous No.15055532]

>>15053002
I unironically have never felt that someone has a higher IQ than me.
Sometimes someone might have more experience in some field or know more about something than me, but never have I ever felt like someone is higher IQ than me.
Are you that much of a cuckold?

[Anonymous No.15055536]

>>15055528
>countless people pronounce it SD, and that is what's most common
countless people also don't believe in the theory of evolution. as a matter of fact, globally, it's the most common position. then again, they're also all idiots who don't know what they're talking about.
>when discussing it among peers, i.e. people familiar with statistics, "sigma" is also definitely quite common
people "familiar" with statistics aren't people who understand statistics. more evidence that you're a pseud and that your peers are also pseuds.

[Anonymous No.15055538]

>>15055536
people's beliefs aren't really relevant to the pronuncations of abbreviations
and yes, by people "familiar" with statistics I am referring to people who have at the very least successfully passed a university-level statistics course and are familiar with the basics of normal distributions

[Anonymous No.15055541]

>>15055538
language is a reflection of your thoughts. if your language indicates a lack of understanding, that's pretty strong evidence that you don't actually know what you're talking about.
> by people "familiar" with statistics I am referring to people who have at the very least successfully passed a university-level statistics course and are familiar with the basics of normal distributions
lmao

[Anonymous No.15055545]

>>15055541
that's not necessarily true at all
in fact, most language is simply conventional
also, there's no "lack of understanding" indicated by pronouncing SD that way at all, contrary to what you erroneously seem to believe
and yes, those are indeed the people I would consider to be "familiar" with statistics

[Anonymous No.15055551]

>>15055545
Ask yourself why only students say that. Same thing as when it's only students who say they need to "derive" (or "derivate") a function as opposed to "differentiate". As has already been explained to you: you're incapable of understanding how you're wrong even when you're told precisely how you're wrong

[Anonymous No.15055556]

>>15055551
Even better: he all but admitted to being accurately pegged as an undergraduate student.

[Anonymous No.15055561]

>>15055551
only students say what?
there's not really anything I've said that "only students" say
also, technically speaking, after they've already successfully passed a statistics course they're not really students of statistics anymore
as for people saying "derive" or "derivate" that's primarily a matter of language, since "differentiation" is called "derivation" in most Romance and Germanic languages
in fact, it's rather English that's the odd one out there
as for me being wrong, I can't recall having been wrong about anything I've said so far, so if you could kindly point to that, that would be great
in contrast I would remind you that you were not aware of what percentiles the various SDs extended to, so as far as I'm aware you've been the only one to make any overt mistakes so far
not that there's any problem with that, everyone makes mistakes from time to time

[Anonymous No.15055562]

>>15055561
only students say "ess-dee" when talking about standard deviations

[Anonymous No.15055570]

>>15055562
that is empirically incorrect, as even professors occasionally pronounce this abbreviation just like that
believing that they'd use "sigma" exclusively honestly sounds more like what someone not familiar with statistics would believe to be the case
and as mentioned above, the incredulity you expressed when it was pointed out that you get to the top percentile within 3 SDs makes me suspect that you are indeed not particularly familiar with statistics

[Anonymous No.15055572]

>>15055570
>even professors occasionally pronounce this abbreviation just like that
now you're just making stuff up. take the L homie, you'll come out looking better.

[Anonymous No.15055573]

>>15055572
>you're just making stuff up
that is incorrect
they really do
again:
>believing that they'd use "sigma" exclusively honestly sounds more like what someone not familiar with statistics would believe to be the case
>and as mentioned above, the incredulity you expressed when it was pointed out that you get to the top percentile within 3 SDs makes me suspect that you are indeed not particularly familiar with statistics

[Anonymous No.15055577]

>>15055573
>they really do
wrong.

[Anonymous No.15055582]

>>15055572
>>15055573
also, just to be clear, I'm referring to this post of yours: >>15055498
there you very evidently express that you believe less than 3 SDs above the mean can't possibly be in the top percentile, which it is
this indicates to me that you are most likely not particularly familiar with statistics

[Anonymous No.15055590]

>>15055582
Nobody makes 2.7sigma a cutoff pseud

[Anonymous No.15055596]

>>15055590
first of all, you're the only one who has talked about a cutoff
the actual "cutoff" for the first test I took at Mensa's locale only measured IQ to 135+ for getting 40/40 right, I had to take an additional test to get a more accurate measurement, which placed me at 140
you will notice that 135 isn't a whole number of SDs either, so once again it seems that your ideas are more like those of people imagining what statistics are like, rather than one familiar with statistics
given what I mention here (>>15055582), it seems quite clear to me at this point that you have very little actual experience with statistics

[Anonymous No.15055600]

>>15055596
>he paid for a mensa test
Lmao. Peak midwit.

[Anonymous No.15055606]

>>15055600
well, if you want them to give you an official test, you have to pay a nominal fee for it, of course
also, given that Mensa is exclusively made up of people in the 98th percentile, I'd say that "midwit" is once again quite an egregious mischaracterization of any of its members in terms of IQ

[Anonymous No.15055608]

>>15055606
Ahahahahahahahah

[Anonymous No.15055609]

>>15055608
hmm, I can't see how anything I just said could be considered funny
are you alright?

[Anonymous No.15055612]

>>15055609
Trust me, once others read your post I won't be the only one laughing at you

[Anonymous No.15055620]

>>15055612
I doubt it, unless they too seem to be having a mental breakdown for some reason
what I just said was rather straightforward, nothing really noteworthy about it

[Aether king of sci No.15055623]

[Anonymous No.15055624]

>>15055609
Anon basically if youre IQ circa 110-130 you have a similar problem to people around 90.
People with IQ around 90 are just smart enough to conceive of a crime, but not to get away with it, so it's a hotbed of criminality.
In a similar way, people in that 110-130 range even as high as 145 are smart enough to be smarter than most people so they think they're really smart.
Around 160 you realize everyone is retarded, including and especially you with your 160, have no idea what's going on.

[Anonymous No.15055631]

>>15055624
that's highly inaccurate
the difference between e.g. 115 and 130 is vastly great than that between 130 and 145, which in turn is also significantly great than that between 145 and 160
that's how normal distributions work
it's not that people of IQ 160 are unparalleled geniuses, they're just marginally more intelligent than people with a lower IQ, and that margin is sufficient when you get that many SDs away from the mean to place you above those who are marginally less intelligent
but yes, your overall point definitely stands, the more intelligent you are, the more sympathetic you become to ideas like cognitive closure (transcendental naturalism) and that even the smartest humans are just clever apes, but you definitely don't need an IQ of 160 to understand that, even me with my "measly" 140 understand as much

[Anonymous No.15055638]

>>15055624
>>15055631
greater*
only making a correction since I made the typo twice, otherwise one might think I'm not familiar with the comparative inflection

[Anonymous No.15055639]

>>15055631
>overall point stands
Yes. I have ADHD which gives me an expressive and metaphorical communication style. Didn't mean to imply you're dumb cuz you're not.
Basically there's a bunch of people between 110-130 who've never had a person outclassed the shit out of them and they think they're Jimmy neutron or some shit.

[Anonymous No.15055640]

>>15055631
>1stdev ≠ 1stdev

[Anonymous No.15055656]

>>15055639
well, I know perfectly well that I'm extremely intelligent regardless of what you or anyone else might say
but yes, around 110-120 what you say is most applicable
around 130 you almost reach the 98th percentile, at which point even most of those above you are generally not that much smarter than you
>>15055640
that's not at all what I said, so that's a rather peculiar straw man
the point is rather that IQ doesn't measure absolute intelligence, it measures relative intelligence, and the normal distribution simply distributes people based on this relative comparison
in other words, a person of IQ 160 is generally not going to be that much smarter than a person of IQ 145 in absolute terms, only marginally smarter, but with a sufficient margin that far from the mean to be placed an entire SD above them despite how they are still quite close in intelligence in absolute terms
in contrast, someone of IQ 130 is typically going to be considerably more intelligent than someone of IQ 115 in absolute terms

[Anonymous No.15055665]

>>15053007
you're definitely the dumbest person in the thread though.

[Anonymous No.15055705]

>>15055141
This.
Helps you cope better

[Anonymous No.15055759]

>>15053002
If you're humble and good and ask a lot of questions people will think very highly of you regardless of how you feel about yourself with added bonus of getting smarter and maybe making friends. Being the smartest is overrated if you can't navigate social relationships (which you can work on)

[Anonymous No.15055779]

>>15053007

[Anonymous No.15055788]

>>15053002
no, i hate feeling like im surrounded by idiots. I dont mind being the dumbest person in the room, i find intelligent people make far better company, usually

[Anonymous No.15055791]

>>15055264
We really need to incorporate online ID verification and make it to where only 22 and up can post here.

[Anonymous No.15055800]

>>15053002
Im happy when Im not the smartest in the room, It can be frustrating to accept your limits but think it like this: If you weren't in that room that guy who is smarter than you would be roaming the world and you wouldn't have the opportunity to talk with him or learn from him, so it's a pretty win situation,.

[Anonymous No.15055806]

>>15055474
>free will
idc
>consciousness
please leave me alone
>covid vaccines
seriously, please leave
>IQ
i dont want to talk with you
>Ukraine
please go away, you smell weird
>quantum mechanics
leave me alone you freak
>parapsychology
seriously, go away who are you anyways? do I know you?
>the trolley problem
go away I dont know you

[Anonymous No.15055808]

>>15055665
80-IQ bantz.

[Anonymous No.15055815]

>>15055481
>>>IQ
>pseudoscience.
you are wrong

[Anonymous No.15055847]

>>15055435
>i will make the midwits into genuises by sharing and thus fill the room with more intelligence myself

there's always some value in somebody who doesn't know what the fuck is going on - you can't rely on conventions and common assumptions to explain things, so they'll often ask questions that would never be considered

of course, that's midwits. the retards are the ones who won't engage with the topic and instead hyperfixate on asinine personal competition like trying to one-up IQ with a fucking trivia contest

[Anonymous No.15055903]

>>15055791
I'm 35 though.

[Anonymous No.15055912]

>>15055481
IQ is probably the most rigorous and falsifiable aspect of any science, physics included.
Consciousness, likewise is receiving a lot of interest as animal intelligence is further studied. Consciousness is being studied at the highest levels and the future will bear this out

[Anonymous No.15055955]

>>15053002
that's funny because actually smart people wouldn't even show it off to you, only slightly accomplished midwits who haven't shed animalistic status concerns yet would. You're probably a ~95IQ tard who recently read 2-3 challenging books and convinced himself of being uncommonly brilliant

[Anonymous No.15055975]

>>15055955
Stop IQ shaming

[Anonymous No.15055990]

>>15055474
tell us the answers please

[Anonymous No.15056190]

>>15055975
No

[Anonymous No.15056493]

>>15053002
I have two guys at uni. They destroy me academically, one has borderline photographic memory.
We sometimes play EU4 and other games and I completely wreck them/save their asses/have to babysit them.
Only because other excel in some ways doesn't mean you can't crush them in other ways.

[Anonymous No.15056558]

https://youtu.be/4lwFK1ImzcA

[Anonymous No.15056563]

>>15055474
>free will
Will exists, not entirely free as in freedom

>consciousness
Of course it exists, everyone has it

>covid vaccines
Not taking it, the clotshot.

>IQ
Irrelevant for me

>Ukraine
Distraction

>quantum mechanics
Useless to me

>parapsychology
Useless to me

>the trolley problem
Pray and do nothing. Maybe leave the area to not be bothered by the police.

Exception: always save the whites