/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.15546376]

130+ IQ and autism is among the worst things that can happen to a person. My IQ will bring me nothing. Every day I hear of highly intelligent people working in coordinated groups. I imagine them in their suits, talking fast, getting things done efficiently, and I know deep down inside that I will never achieve that. A socially savvy 115 IQ person will ALWAYS outcompete me. I will always be in the group of "intelligent but incompetent".

[Anonymous No.15546396]

>>15546376
Maybe you haven't considered that you may not have a 130+ IQ. Just autism.

[Anonymous No.15546407]

>>15546376
Choose a profession where you can work mostly alone. And when communication is needed find something where you can divide and delegate stuff with clear interfaces which reliably work or can at least objectively being discussed.

Software development works great, or go for a science career (which is solo most of the time anyway).

[Anonymous No.15546417]

145 is the minimum. That’s based on the WAISIV, 147 for the SB. These minimums are what constitute a minimally intelligent human bean.

[Anonymous No.15546437]

>>15546396
No, I have actually taken an IQ test which was administered by a psychologist.

[Anonymous No.15546439]

>>15546417
i have that and the 'tism.
>>15546407
I dislike science and software.

realistically people like us ought to be eligible for disability. 0 life prospects

[Anonymous No.15546440]

>>15546437
I take it your score is picrel?

[Anonymous No.15546442]

>>15546437
Sure you have. Like everyone else on /sci/ who had their 232 IQ professionally tested by Einstein himself, who then gave you the title of Aryan ubermensch. Right?

[Anonymous No.15546443]

>122
I'll make a really good manager at mcdonalds, I guess.

[Anonymous No.15546451]

>>15546376
you sure do seem to like talking about yourself on social media

[Anonymous No.15546459]

>>15546443
You just need 100 for that. 80 to work at Mcdonalds.

[Anonymous No.15546466]

>>15546459
I got rejected from Mcdonalds at 136. Surely there must be an upper limit as well.

[Barkun Demi-GodofSCI !hax6YPhEF6 No.15546472]

>intelligence quotes

[Anonymous No.15546477]

>>15546439
Pretty soon everybody's gonna be on disability

[Anonymous No.15546480]

>>15546443
What are your indices? PRI, VCI, WMI?

[Anonymous No.15546483]

>>15546442
No, I took the WISC-V when I was a teenager and got a score in the 99.6 percentile of human intelligence.

[Anonymous No.15546509]

>>15546477
they will deny people like us.

[Anonymous No.15546521]

>>15546483
WISC and WAIS are bullshit lib tests developed to satiate retards. Only the Stanford-Binet results are trustworthy for actual intelligence.

[Anonymous No.15546532]

"mental illness" is synonymous with "brain damage"
if you have poor mental function and a diseased brain then you are not high iq, it would not be considered an illness if it weren't damaging
>hey that guy is really strong, because he has a muscular disease

heres an article about how people with narcissistic personality disorder love to play victim as a justification for demanding sympathy and gibes

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0092656611000912
>Racial differences in narcissistic tendencies: In essence, this explanation suggests that being a member of a minority group may serve as a buffer against adversity because members of devalued groups are able to externalize negative experiences by attributing them to discrimination or prejudice. The results of the present studies provide consistent support for racial differences in narcissism such that Black individuals tend to report higher levels of narcissism than White individuals.

the same principles apply just as much to people who want to pretend to be handicapped, mentally or otherwise

[Anonymous No.15546548]

many people with high iq cant function in society or do basic tasks.
You are just baiting with lé sciencedirect article

[Anonymous No.15546549]

>>15546532
Right, because the brain is a 1 dimensional slider.
Anon, god news is that you're not autistic, just plain retarded.

[Anonymous No.15546558]

>>15546521
But for most autists, the SB tends to give higher scores than the Wechsler

[Anonymous No.15546642]

>>15546558
Well then, that just means autists are even smarter than we thought.

[Anonymous No.15546645]

>>15546548
If they can't function then they aren't really high IQ. If they had an IQ that high they would be able to formulate a plan to improve their life situation and enact it.

[Anonymous No.15546660]

ignore the bait above anons

[Anonymous No.15546677]

Ah great another IQ test thread. Thanks anon what a relief to see this high quality thread.

[Anonymous No.15546856]

>>15546645
Turns out IQ and life success peaks out somewhere around 125-135

[Anonymous No.15546915]

>>15546532
this
mental illness is a magnet for special snowflake types, it both justifies their self endowed special snowflake status and excuses themselves from having any special accomplishments to justify their special snowflake status

[Anonymous No.15547440]

>>15546376
It's over for you, just stop breathing. Take a deep breath and hold it until you pass out, it's the most peaceful way to die

[Anonymous No.15547465]

Try being unequally gifted
VCI 150
PRI 100
WMI 123
PSI 131

FSIQ 133

It's over

[Anonymous No.15547511]

>>15546376
fake

[Anonymous No.15547512]

>>15546483
IQ tests are worthless, but have you considered that pretty much everyone around you is just retarded in comparison, and just don't understand when you talk to them as you normally would?

[Anonymous No.15547527]

>>15546645
You're right. I used to be a robot and it infuriated me. I went to theater classes after school for a few years. Ended up as a very good actor.
If he truly was high IQ, he'd be able to do just about anything he set his mind on, including and all the way to mastering his tongue and body.
I was tested at "160+" five years ago. I'm honest.

[Anonymous No.15547573]

minecraft in space

[Anonymous No.15547597]

>>15547527
>If he truly was high IQ, he'd be able to do just about anything he set his mind on
that is not really how it works. that's just corporate saying "we need to monetize them".

[Anonymous No.15547609]

>>15547597
Maybe not how it works for you. I achieved every mental and bodily related goal I set myself to learn. Most of the time I excel, too. It has nothing to do with money and everything about 'me'.
What prevents you from identifying and working on things you perceive problematic? It's your castle. Shouldn't be a barrier for truly high IQ individuals.
I see mental illnesses as a penalty on IQ because it acts as a filter for your senses, preventing you from thinking clearly. Granted, I'm not immune from bad habits, but you will not conquer anything if you can't defeat yourself first.

[Anonymous No.15547613]

>>15547609
>What prevents you from identifying and working on things you perceive problematic?
wouldn't corporate like to know that

[Anonymous No.15547617]

>>15547613
You wish I was corporate.
I'm trying to have a meaningful conversation by contributing.
The question I asked you is hypothetical and abstract. There's no right answer, there's your answer.
Really, I don't need to know because I don't truly care about your case, I tried to convey a concept.

[Anonymous No.15547687]

>>15547527
I think you're a retard.

[Anonymous No.15548091]

>>15547527
160, that's cute

[Anonymous No.15548127]

>>15546521
This. WAIS isn't as g-loaded as the Standord-Binet. It is popular only because it is better for non-English speakers and they try to be inclusive. If you speak English as a first lang. and took the WAIS (or WISC) instead of SB, your results are null and void, artificially inflated (or deflated). Take the SB, or don't even think about whatever other bs score you got.
>>15546856
Also this. At 125-135, you can enter any profession you like and do good. You will be smart enough, but not too smart (aka, autistic NEET nerd loser with no social skill who will fail at life). Above 135, you become so much of an outlier it's a detriment to your life. You are highkey mentally ill at that point, and your life as a 132 is objectively better than at 150. Being a little in touch with your ooga booga instincts helps you live a better life as humans are meant to, bigger number isn't always better. Picrel is my belief, and no I have no source but it is objectively correct.

[Anonymous No.15548137]

>>15548127
This is exactly what a retard would say

[Anonymous No.15548185]

>>15548137
This is an anonymous board. You either negate my point head on, or you babble like a retard if you can't, which you did. I'm not posting my IQ to give credence to my post, my argument speaks for itself. And so does yours. And it is clear you just dislike your position on the life quality curve. But sometimes you just have to contend with unchanging realities.

[Anonymous No.15548205]

>>15548127
IQ is an invalid measure.
The neocortex is the part that actually makes you understand things. The cerebellum is the dumb lizard brain that operates on patterns and categories. The more you use the mammal brain (which can understand) the less you use the lizard brain (which can only make dumb guesses based on statistics). It's simply impossible to convey the enormous depth of understanding that people completely miss.
It's sort of as if you could understand syntax, but not morphology. And the world speaks a polysynthetic language. You desperately try to make sense of things, find some logic in it, but you can't. People make up new words all the time that you just don't know. You decide to be the voice of reason - let's make a list of words that we all know, so that we can all understand each other, but the "dumb" people ignore you, because it's you who is dumb, as everyone understands, it's you who has a problem with it.
Morphologically complex languages have little to no syntax, as there is little to add that their morphology doesn't take care of. So centuries later you could boast how you brought language from mere grunts to Latin, and from Latin to English, but others would rightfully blame you for destroying the language. But for you, it would look like English is far more advanced, look at its complex word order, how crazy are you to deny it? Do you want us to go back to grunts? Then you must be too stupid to speak our new complex language.
IQ at best measures your reliance on the primitive brain, which has hardly any correlation with intelligence, as people evolved to be more neocortex based than almost any other animal - on the contrary, those with a poorly functioning neocortex rely on the primitive brain more, and will score higher IQ.

[Anonymous No.15548216]

>>15548205
Interesting but autistics have more of a neocortex and score higher on g, while schizos have have less neocortex and lower g
I think the rest is right though
>5'3 bracycephalic NVLD tranny

[Anonymous No.15548232]

>>15548216
>NVLD
I never heard of that, but just from the Wikipedia article it seems to be the opposite of autism, and accurately describes the trouble you'd have with an absent neocortex function. You may have similar trouble for opposite reasons.

[Anonymous No.15548238]

>>15548232
This is all accurate and I want to kms for it
I have a very weak grasp on reality vs being hyper accurate like autism gives you
I'll never be neurodivergent

[Anonymous No.15548240]

>>15546376
What exactly makes you conclude you have autism? Asking OP but also the thread in general.

[Anonymous No.15548291]

>>15548185
This is not even wrong

[Anonymous No.15548300]

>>15548238
Wow that's so sad, have you considered that you should just hold your breath and pass out. It's the most peaceful way to die

[Anonymous No.15548313]

You are shit at pattern recognition (which is trainable btw), atleast probably according to some free online test, or one of the hundred "real" professional ones which all differ anyway. How sad. You will never be invited to the circlejerk Mensa. Boohoo.

If only there were other parts to intelligence, not including the other ones more about emotion or whatever.

[Anonymous No.15548314]

>>15548205
I attempted to understand your argument to the best of my ability, so If I misunderstood, just ignore it.

I think it's an over-generalization to make the statement you are making.
I don't believe that IQ is the measure of reliance on the primitive brain. In fact, it is the exact opposite. The primate brain, or Neocortex is a large organ. It does a lot of things, almost everything that differentiates us as human, so it would be disingenous to say that it works with only intelligence, but intelligence is certainly one of the things that IT works with, not the mammalian or reptilian brain, which are involved more in emotional, sensory, memory, motor and reflexive/autopilot/instinctual functions etc. Functions that we share with other animals as well, though they may be more complex in us. Which makes sense, since the primitive parts of the brain evolved first, so we evolutionarily share the MRCA that evolved it with many more species than the neocortex, the most recently evolved region. And the most recently evolved regions are going to be more unique to us, so it must make sense that it works for the abilities unique to us as well, e.g intelligence.
More specifically, I think you are arguing against the exact definition of intelligence (though I could be wrong). In that, I believe what you said was, that intelligence as we define it relies on ability in higher level cognitive functioning, while ignoring the more lower level reductionist approach to the world. But in fact, higher level functioning (Syntax in your metaphor) evolves after the lower level functioning (Morphology in your metaphor). Gain of a new ability doesn't make you lose the older ability, just like gain of lower level cognitive ability doesn't make you lose reflexive instinct.
Point is, syntactical complexity doesn't necessarily take away from morphological complexity. Perhaps in some cases, but in most, not. Just as morphological complexity doesn't take away from phonetic complexity.

[Anonymous No.15548367]

>>15548314
>But in fact, higher level functioning (Syntax in your metaphor) evolves after the lower level functioning (Morphology in your metaphor).
The opposite. Syntax is meant to be the primitive brain, and morphology is meant to be the neocortex. The analogy was meant to illustrate how you may see your self as more intelligent than others as you use more syntax (which is what you do understand) while being oblivious (or even annoyed and confused) by the morphology that you don't understand. And, how you may see yourself improving things - you added new syntax, stabilized the vocabulary (you made them say friend where they previously couldn't decide between friend, freond, freonda, freondes, freondum...) and whittled down all the other garbage, while in reality you're making things more primitive.

[Anonymous No.15548721]

>>15548367
>The opposite. Syntax is meant to be the primitive brain, and morphology is meant to be the neocortex.
But morphology is more primitive to syntax? Just as syntax is primitive to semantics, or phonology is primitive to morphology?

But otherwise, I'm ngl, I'm entirely lost on what you're trying to say.

[Anonymous No.15549258]

>>15548721
This is hopeless.

How do you deal with someone who is stupid, but can't be explained that they are stupid, and insists on teachig people to adopt his ideas?

[Anonymous No.15549259]

>>15548721
This is hopeless.

How do you deal with someone who is stupid, but can't be explained that he is stupid, and insists on teaching people to adopt his ideas?

[Anonymous No.15549285]

Everyone malding and being pathetic ITT. Just thought I’d describe the mood.

[Anonymous No.15549299]

>>15546532
this, ppl wh have the instinct to whine for sympathy from strangers on the internet are all in the npd group