/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.1968405]

Dear /sci/.

I was recently IQ tested with a score of a 141.
This comes as no surprise to me as there was never a concept that went over my head.
Now I'm interested.

Those of you with a 160+ IQ score, please share with me your most cutting edge insights and world views.
I wish to know of what the real geniuses see that I can't.

[Anonymous No.1968406]

Inb4 shitstorm.

[Anonymous No.1968408]

have you ever wondered that, you know, that retarded people are just playing with you? seeing how long they can keep it up for?

[Anonymous No.1968411]

You're looking for someone who has a tested IQ over 4 deviations.

IQ tests don't test beyond 4 deviations.

Also, this read as a troll thread.

[Anonymous No.1968413]

Is relativity and quantum mechanics intuitive for you?

[Anonymous No.1968433]

160 is almost the max anyway
do you really think a genius would waste his time on 4chan? only the most retarded threads get attention
and I doubt a real genius would believe in an iq test anyway.

[Anonymous No.1968444]

>>1968413
Very much so.
>>1968411
First of all, there are high range tests.
Second of all, I don't need a precise measurement, just an indication that a person had broken the test's ceiling score.
That person should then share it with me.
Not so hard, is it?
>>1968408
Used to think so for a time. But I highly doubt it.
>>1968433
True. But geniuses are more likely to be attracted to the esoteric mentality that this site provides.

[Anonymous No.1968448]

>>1968444

High range tests are invalid indications for intelligence as measured through psychometric tests.

The Titan Test =/= valid IQ.

Also, the Mensa test is rubbish.

[Anonymous No.1968453]

>>1968448
The Titan test isn't the only one out there.
And others that are not by Hoeflin.

[Anonymous No.1968457]

This is a troll thread

[Anonymous No.1968458]

Get MacArthur genius grant, get moolah, spend on good organizations.

[Anonymous No.1968459]

>choose random answers on a iq test
>get 102
>feel geniously intelligent

[Anonymous No.1968468]

>>1968453

Find a high range IQ test that isn't by Hoefflin. Needing citation.

Also, IQ measures a very specific aspect of human thought, one does not become some sort of "intellectual messiah" upon achieving an IQ of 160+. Most child prodigies are rather dull characters.

Still saging, as this thread's foundation topic is poor.

[Anonymous No.1968473]

>True. But geniuses are more likely to be attracted to the esoteric mentality that this site provides.

You have an IQ of 141 and think this. I think this concept went over your head: the site does not have an "esoteric mentality", it is mostly blubbering about things of no intellectual significance; homework threads; "help me" threads; "no u", "NO U", threads and last, but certainly not least, troll threads.
If you want esoteric material you do not go to 4chan.
I geniuses mind would waste away here.

[Anonymous No.1968478]

>Now I'm interested.
>capitalises the "i".
>IQ 141

nope.jpg

>please share with me your most cutting edge insights and world views.

Go read Nietzsche or Marx.

[Anonymous No.1968484]

Well, I've only had some subtests for performance and working memory scores. My performance score is the same as yours (141) but my working memory is 60. I'd expect that my verbal IQ is in 150-160s since I have ADHD and my math mark was always lower than my English mark. (I had A in languages and C at math)

Logical positivism sums up my world view.
I also support big government and planned economy.

[Anonymous No.1968487]

>>1968444
>Very much so.

>he thinks relativity and quantum mechanics are intuitive

Troll detected. Einstein didn't find that shit "intuitive".

[Anonymous No.1968496]

ill give you something..
look at Neil Gaiman.
look at his works.
do you not realize the depths?
what is burdensom as fact can be blurted as fiction.
Neverwhere is to the buttoneyed ones as Communion(Streiber) was to the almondeyed.
after all.. "MAGNEINGENIASINDEMENTIAMNONFUIT"

[Anonymous No.1968500]

>>1968473
You are of course referring to the 99% garbage threads on 4chan.
But you simply cannot deny that no other site can compete with 4chan when it comes to the truly epic, eye opening and outlandish thread.
We simply wouldn't be here otherwise.

[Anonymous No.1968501]

>>1968496
>Neil Gaiman
>depth
mfw American Gods is fanfic tier
mfw even the characters whine about the book being boring

[Anonymous No.1968506]

>>1968487
Because he belonged to a time of classical mechanics.
But the physics and math behind it are intuitive, once you're willing to accept its premise.
>>1968478
You must be trolling.

[Wyndam No.1968508]

IQ tests are rubish.
Scored 147
I'm still just a regular guy
Just as stupid as everybody

[Anonymous No.1968511]

>>1968500
>epic thread
>Quads lol epic archive plox! xD
>implying you're not here because you'd be banned after your first post for trolling anywhere else

[Anonymous No.1968512]

>>1968508
same here, but I just wish my eq was a bit higher...

[Anonymous No.1968516]

>>1968501
I've never read the book but I've masturbated thinking about the scenes with Bast.

[Anonymous No.1968525]

>Is relativity and quantum mechanics intuitive for you?
>Very much so.

To quote Richard Feynman, " I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics.", so if you really believe that, maybe you ain't as smart as you think you are. Just because you can do the math behind (lol linear algebra) doesn't mean that you understand what's going on.

[Anonymous No.1968531]

>>1968525
Quoted for a Quote of Truth.

[Anonymous No.1968532]

>Because he belonged to a time of classical mechanics.

Irrelevant. We learn things chronologically i.e. we learn in the sequence in which they were discovered. We learn classical mechanics before we learn Einsteinian. Some Newtonian concepts are unintuitive, nevermind Einstein. You don't wake up one day and have an instinct, a hunch, that if you travel really fast your mass increases.

Just because you can learn and understand an abstract concept does NOT mean it is intuitive. Intuitive thinking is mostly done subconsciously, without abstraction: it is instinct. The primitive mind of intuition cannot arrive at the axioms and proofs of euclidean geometry nevermind the 4 dimensional geometry of Einstein, Laplace, Minkowski et al.

[Anonymous No.1968536]

153 here. I've never looked for insights because there is no such thing as individual thought. Any thought you've had is infinitesimally close to that of another person.
I just read and learn to skip the waste of computing time my brain has to go through to get the same damn result.

[Anonymous No.1968537]

>>1968516
me too

does that make me a closet fury?

[Anonymous No.1968543]

>>1968532
extension: if relativity and quantum mechanics could have been discovered and understood intuitively then it would have been discovered centuries ago.
The reality of it is that these branches of physics would not have been opened if it wasn't for the hard work of intellects that came before. We have been building on mathematics and physics since people like Aristotle, Archimedes and Euclid. None of our big advancements in these fields were made by intuition alone.

[Anonymous No.1968544]

>>1968501
when i read an author i collect every of their works and devour them without exception.
i also turn to other releases if available.
it is not possible that Gaiman fails to be aware of some odd depths on this matter.
aware of the movie 'little monsters'?
how could you not be?.. when at one time it had a larger 'managed' fan club than star wars?
if you have no afiliations with the management 'company' then you may not apre-cia-te this.
when you comprehend that sudden crib death and 'full transfer' have a correlation this will all become oddly more meaningful for you as it did for coraline.
again, this requires highly uncomon insight..
MAGNA INGENIA SIN DEMENTIAM NON FUIT
judging from the post with trips op is the real deal

[Anonymous No.1968548]

>>1968405
My IQ is only 105 ;_; but I once calculated the calorie demands of T-rex's lyfestyle and concluded that it could not be an exclusive scavenger.

Years later I read in wikipedia that paleontologists did the same thing.

[Anonymous No.1968551]

>153 here. I've never looked for insights because there is no such thing as individual thought. Any thought you've had is infinitesimally close to that of another person.

Not true. The loftiest insights are few and far between and you have to look at history to see them, but human thought has varied and varies wildly through history and around the world.

[Anonymous No.1968555]

>>1968537
>does that make me a closet fury?

Nah man, nah. It's perfectly natural. That's what she was invented for.

[Anonymous No.1968565]

>>1968548
How did you calculate the calorie demands and what assumptions did you have to make?
And what is the definition of an exclusive scavenger?

[Anonymous No.1968599]

>>1968565
what I had available

I had to assume a metabolism (calorie demands per kilogram) somewhere in between an endotherm and a typical reptile.

I used an african national park's documentary' quote for the average availability of carcasses into an area and used an encyclopedia's quote that T-rex's olfactory bulbs where quite well developed and would allow it to detect decompossing corpses in a range from 20 up to 40 km. Also the caloric value of a large ornithopod's carcass.

All the data were crude of course and hardy comperable but using these not even the most conservative calculations were approaching the demands.

Also because I was an early teen and my mother helped me the with the calculations, when she asked me how vulture can be exclusively scavenging animals I answered they can travel greater distanches with lower demands since they can glide on air currents (which was also years later found on wiki).

can't recall the exact data though, it's been years since

[Anonymous No.1968610]

>>1968599

What test was utilized?

I've often thought of the mediocre as sub-human. You may change my view.

[Anonymous No.1968615]

>>1968565
>>1968565
>what is the definition of an exclusive scavenger?
feed solely on dead animals and mostly ignores live pray even if it seems to be easily accesible

like vultures that will rarely attack even small pray that they can easily overwhelm

hyenas and jackals for example mostly rely on live pray and are opportunistic with carcasses

[Anonymous No.1968616]

Guys, guys, guys, IQ doesn't mean you have a fucking huge amount of wisdom or insight or anything. Sure, given ideal conditions you will most likely find the optimal solution to a problem- but conditions are rarely ideal, even in an academic setting of pencil and paper. It just means that you will be GREAT at learning math, logic, etc. It means that you WILL be able to comprehend things that the ordinary person cannot, but you still have to learn it. This is still very amazing, since now you have the confidence to tackle things most people can't even do in half of their lifetimes. But thinking that ONE person's brainpower is greater than the combined brainpower of thousands of living scientists, who have built upon the brainpower of hundreds of thousands of dead ones, is ridiculous.

Perhaps those insights do exist, and the genius lives in his own mind, falling prey to the banality of the physical world around him. But you will never know those insights- and therefore, in a non-ideal world, they are nearly useless.

[:D !!s2uh28knASO No.1968622]

Read anything from Robert Rosen.

Hes the only one so far that actually gave me a hard time understanding him

IQ 160+ here btw.. if you think thats important

[Anonymous No.1968624]

>yfw you realize that things such as materials, engineering and resource allocation are still very important but are conducted by people with only ~120 IQs because the people who have IQs over 140 so busy circlejerking over their fantasy land that they can't even wipe their own shit

[Anonymous No.1968627]

>>1968610
>What test was utilized?
I am not sure I understand what you mean.

But my data were amateuristic and my calculations were semi-arbitrary and highly hypothetical. It was just curiosity and an attempt to make my own conclusions.

>I've often thought of the mediocre as sub-human. You may change my view.
many people with IQ even slightly less than 100 make it into the Academia and many of them (depending on personal motivation and efforts) contribute much, especially in data gathering if you guide them with the methodical tools. There are even legit zoologists that are creationists. I don't see how that surprises you so much.

[:D !!s2uh28knASO No.1968628]

Also, how old are you??
whats your major?
any basic info about your intellectual life.

if you say you are in fucking high school.. might as well kill yourself now for being such a fag.

[Anonymous No.1968630]

>>1968610
at about 11 years of age i developed a theory that some of the people in the world were opperating on a mind of pure random variation
that they rehashed what they encountered with no processing of the data
that they were barely eligible for consideration as sentient
looking back at it i can see that it may not be a matter of capacity but of aplication
the phemomina of people who do nothing to the 'noise' they intercept other than restate it is clearly evidenciable in the effects of several media activities

[Anonymous No.1968634]

>>1968630
lol you figure that TV and their mainstream audience are a buch of tools until you where 11

LOL.. what a retard.

[Anonymous No.1968635]

>>1968630
>>1968630

Hah, more than merely media activity!

It must be blatantly projected by your peers? This phenomena?

[Anonymous No.1968645]

>mfw op thinks IQ means anything

[Anonymous No.1968648]

>>1968630
You underestimated the number of people in the world at that age.

But still, IQ belongs to the field of psychology. I thought /sci/ hated psychology.

[Anonymous No.1968649]

>>1968648
Not if it confirms their elitism.

[Anonymous No.1968654]

>>1968630

Agreed.

This idea encompasses much more than primarily the media in my eyes.

I also don't believe that IQ is an appropriate estimation of how one may be aligned with this format of thought, as IQ is primarily based upon memory and other executive functions. Just as one could make a computer "intelligent" in this respect, one could believe that a human could function in a similar way.

I define human intelligence as your capacity to create logical mental constructs of how reality functions.

[Anonymous No.1968663]

>>1968630
Individually, this is most likely not true. But looking at groups of people, this is definitely plausible, given how separate the individual systems are from one another.

[Anonymous No.1968664]

sure is samefag here

[Anonymous No.1968683]

Privileged white kid takes a test designed for privileged white kids, scores high

[Anonymous No.1968687]

>>1968630
that sounds like ADHD

[Anonymous No.1968693]

>>1968687
>>1968687

Confirming your deduction as false.

Diagnosed ADHD through EEG and psychoanalysis.

[Anonymous No.1968699]

>>1968693
and what portion of the population is diagnosed with this?

[Anonymous No.1968716]

the way i see it, there are people who achieve things and people whose only achievement is creating more people. some of whom may achieve things, and most of whom will simply create more people... and so on.

only a small percentage of each generation really contributes to the advancement of knowledge, but everyone else is necessary too since they are the primary source of the next generation.

in other words, people have their necessary function and regarding average people as somehow less important would be vastly incorrect. also objectionably elitist but that's more a personal viewpoint.

[Anonymous No.1969259]

>>1968634
your statement is defective as is, presumably, your intelect
inb4 ad hominem arguement
>>1968648
my statement has no reference to the 'number of people in the world'
again, i am forced to ask that you examine yourself for flaws before posting or readily acknowledge the poor quality of your contribution
>>1968654
yes more than.. i only cited one readily available example with ample data already collected to cite the obvious need to not further evidence the claim
the crux of the argument made is that it is not that people really can not use their mental faculties(i.e. lack of capacity)
subtly presented is the idea that at the time i made the theory i belived it to be a matter of actual limitation of ability
this was a relief to me at the time as it absolved me of the burden of any attempt to communicate higher thought to the more incapable(i.e. unapplied)
>>1968663
your repeated use of the pronoun 'this' fails to shed light on 'the individual systems' you are refering to. could you be more specific to make clear that you even are adressing the same concepts? even a clairvoyant would have to go out on a limb to meet such a statement halfway, at risk that they might be dealing with a troll conversationalist who delights in rejectionistic postscript wordplay.
>>1968687
at the time, the diagnosis did not exist
at the time, i had for 6 years been involved in programs such as the ones you can investigate for yourself here;
ISBN-13: 9780882821962
ISBN: 0882821962
as a result, at the time, i had considerable intrest in maintianing the exclusivity of my mental preoccupations.
>>1968716
i am im complete agreement with your statement

[Anonymous No.1969876]

apparently you can't grasp the concept that this thread reveals that

u r a fag

[Anonymous No.1969885]

>>1969259

Super fucking cool story.
Grammar, I...

[Anonymous No.1969902]

>>1968716
I've had viewpoint for quite some time as well.

Some 1% who actively make the various innovations, findings, and steps towards increasing humanity's influence in the world, and the remaining 99% who uphold the machinery of it all.

[Anonymous No.1969973]

IQ 152

I believe society and civilization has had one constant, progress. This is what we should base our functionality around.

Significant effort should be made to minimize the chance of the collapse of civilization (the greatest possible amplifier of advancement) and 100% indpendent human habitats should be made in locations maximizing the chances of the survival of mankind.

Workers farmers etc should know their place as keeping society functioning and working, while trying to give in anypossible way towards advancement

Scientists, inventors etc should be held to a high esteam as they progress society and create new breakthrough technologies that fuel mankinds march forward

The poor, the addicts, bankers etc should be removed from society as they take from the whole without providing to it anything. It takes energy and food to keep a homeless man alive.

The point is to ensure the highest possibility of survival, with the fastest rate of progress

[None !CAgEU2NTKA No.1970004]

>>1968536
I've always thought this too. Can you explain more?

[None !CAgEU2NTKA No.1970015]

>>1969973
But empathizing, especially with those who aren't the 'same' as you, I think, is very important to societies progress. I think it is our duty as a species to help those who are not enlightened.

[Anonymous No.1970021]

>>1969885
yea grammer can be sited as flawed but i structured it as i did for reason
overly complex forms might be more well received in spoken context, with tonal inflection to set context and emphasis
intresting that you didnt site any of the points you refer to.
besides the point of that whole that post was agreement with >>1968716

the rest of it is little more than nitpicking trollesque bullshit the likes of which of which i have endured more than my fair share
pic related; sometimes things seem wrong to those who dont know how they are supposed to be (crosswind compensation)

[Anonymous No.1970028]

I have an insight

There are dickheads posting ITT

[Anonymous No.1970033]

>>1968405
how do you determine if someone you meet is intelligent?

[None !CAgEU2NTKA No.1970044]

>>1970033
Not op...but...being human, I don't think it is possible. You just have to assume everyone is your equal.

That is my opinion, anyway.

[Anonymous No.1970046]

>>1968478
>Go read Nietzsche or Marx.
lol fucking morons. Either would be lucking to scrape 120. Go read Swedenborg.

[Anonymous No.1970048]

>>1970044
but surely you see that some people are more capable than others

[Anonymous No.1970060]

>>1969973
can you state what data you have collected on these efforts?
are you aware of the state of accomplishment each stands at at present?
not all is laid out before public intrests where it would surely be in peril if a such a collapse were to occure.

[Anonymous No.1970064]

My IQ is 115 and I am lazy as fuck. Should I an-hero?

[None !CAgEU2NTKA No.1970075]

Guys.

Everyone is fighting right now.

However, fighting is pointless as it does nothing productive for society. If society is to progress we need to look to ALL humans as capable of the same thoughts as we are.

Or we'll kill each other.

[Anonymous No.1970113]

>>1970060
>>1970060
I've not studies or interviews beyond my immediate friends whom I find trustworthy, the tragety of this is it can easily be viewed as elitist (although it is for the benifit of man as a whole) and is therefore unlikely to gain popular vote

[Anonymous No.1970127]

>>1970021
>>1969259
Protip: This guy is a troll conversationalist who delights in rejectionistic postscript wordplay

[Anonymous No.1970241]

>>1969973
I can see how /sci/ would like this, its a good idea, and its also to scientists what racism is to white people

[Anonymous No.1970274]

Ive never had a true IQ test before.
Does anyone have any free and online ones that i could take to get a idea of my number?

[Anonymous No.1970348]

members of high IQ societies are vastly under represented in bleeding edge research, rather near non-existent

do they really think talking about language and fiction books helps progress because that seems to be the topic most of the time

[Anonymous No.1970398]

>>1970348
The large scale exchange of information and ideas is essential retaining the spike in progression we've had recently. The internet is like one big brainstorming session. Its doing humanity good

[Anonymous No.1970509]

I never understood the reason of keeping the human race alive.
What drives you to progress humanity?
Why would you care?
Your death is inevitable.
Why is progressing humanity your first priority instead of your own life?
You only have one life and waste it for others.
The reason of life is to live.
The purpose of life is to live.
So why do you feel the need to progress when everything you need to live is already there.

[Anonymous No.1970530]

Are you fucking serious?

You take IQ that serious?

It is very fucking hard to measure intelligence and a simple test can not do that.

And just because people have IQs doesn't make them smart. They are still ignorant sheep.

No wonder Stephen Hawking called people who care about IQs losers.

[Anonymous No.1970551]

>>1970530
>mfw Stephen Hawking

[Anonymous No.1970554]

>>1970551
Yes Stephen Hawking.

Who am I going to trust? Stephen or some fucking college kids on /sci/?

[Anonymous No.1970575]

>>1970551
Where is your face?

[Anonymous No.1970568]

>>1970554

He's just mad because he scored in the low 150s.

[Anonymous No.1970577]

>>1970568
>implying IQ means anything
>implying measuring someones intelligence is possible

College kids, they are so stupid.

[Anonymous No.1970622]

167 tested here.

I work as a park ranger in Northern California. Never went to college. Perhaps to your surprise, I'm not a (or at least not a traditional) conservationist. Maybe I'm an environmentalist, but that word has been corrupted in recent years by politicians. I believe that the best environment is the one most conducive to personal growth, regardless if that environment is filled with wonderful trees or cold and gray skyscrapers. I have a lot of hope for sustainability movements coming out of universities today though. They're finally ditching appeals to emotion in favor of sound logic.

No, I'm not in Mensa. Went to one meeting and it was full of horribly boring people with deeply-rooted insecurities.

[Anonymous No.1970644]

>>1970622

He meant 4+ deviations above the norm!

You're only 3 or below!

Leave!

[Anonymous No.1970668]

>>1970509
Sorry, I just got back.

The purope of life is to live, for those who cannot comprehend life with logic. Man can do that, what makes us unique is our ability to adapt and change our surroundings to fit our needs, moving society forward. If we are going to exist we must exist for something, the mainstream of nihilism will be the death of civilization. There can be a goal, like creating an ubermensch was a far off goal for nietzche, the goal for all of man will be to aquire all knowledge, power and ability. It may take a billion years but if man does not fall to the way side, all paths lead to the same way

Apotheosis. The question is wether we can get there be entropy, or a thousand other obstacles.

[parahacker No.1970670]

179, bitches.

I still have the old, coffee-stained piece of shit paper in the bottom of a bin that proves it.

of course I was a kid. So there was like a sliding scale and shit I benefited from. Also, IQ tests are shit. Even the stanford-bernet, which is the one I took. (spelled right? fuck it. find out if you care.)

Being smart separates you. Being PERCIEVED as smart separates you even more. But being smarter than even all the other smart kids in a 300 mile radius, at least? Eh.

Mom liked to lie and say I was 180, because she was just 'rounding up'. Pssht. She was bragging.

What have I come up with?
Being this smart fucking sucks.

...

I see things that other people don't, and I can't /tell/ them.
Mistakes repeated over and over.
Nobody gets my jokes.
Nobody gets my normal fucking conversation, unless I slow it down to a point that's painful for me.

Ever heard of the "Curse Of Knowledge?" It's from a study done by economists trying to be psychologists back in the '90's. But they got it right. Basically, the CoK states that you will forget what it's like to be innocent. Forget what it's like to not know.

Now apply that to someone who is just as human, but just learns things faster.

It is so ronery.

It's possible to hold a template of innocence/pre-knowledge in your mind AND the knowledge that supercedes it, but really fucking hard, as I can tell you from long and bitter experience. I suppose some gaming nerds would say my wisdom score is low. They might be right.

I got no wisdom, but hey, at least I got a big CoK.

[parahacker No.1970673]

But you asked for an epiphany. Ok.

Paradox.

That's my epiphany.

Study the behavior of infinities. And try - REALLY try - to picture how a limitless infinity might behave.

If it's limitless, of course, it must INCLUDE things that limit it. God lifting the impossible rock. But try to picture it. Try to hold in your mind that such a thing is possible.

If you can.

If you can do this.

Then ask yourself one question. One very important question.

What is the opposite of this infinity that encapsulates its own limits?

If you are the one fucking human being on this planet that can meet me in this place, then I've got a motherfucking beer for you, broseph. And then we can sit down and I'll show you my math. 'cause that shit is hardcore. Had to invent new symbolic notation, proof theory was lacking.

Peace.

[Anonymous No.1970678]

Oh my gosh, parahacker, your comments touched my soul. I know exactly how you feel.

Fuck this shit.

[Anonymous No.1970683]

>>1970670
>>1970670
>>1970670

Lol, pretty sure Stanford-Binet is on a standard deviation of 22 or 24. Trying to find a source atm.

[Anonymous No.1970685]

>>1970678
Please tell me that was sarcasm. That guy is a faggot.

[Anonymous No.1970693]

>>1970683
>>1970683

Nevermind, it's on a deviation of 16.

Still, you probably regressed to the 150's range. I find it hard to believe there's a 1 in a million scorer on /sci/ currently.

[Anonymous No.1970704]

>>1970670
>>1970673
I understood what you said just then in normal conversation, does that mean I'm TEH SMART!?!?!!!!!

[Anonymous No.1970706]

>>1970683
>>1970683

Nevermind, it's on a deviation of 16.

Still, you probably regressed to the 150's range. I find it hard to believe there's a 1 in a million scorer on /sci/ currently. What age did you take it? There can often be harsh IQ fluctuations in early age.

[parahacker No.1970712]

>>1970685

Of course I'm a faggot. I'm here, aren't I?

You're a faggot too. Just for thinking your opinion matters worth a shit. Same as me. I'd still kick your ass if I ever met you, but you are completely right.

[Anonymous No.1970715]

>IQ thread
>tried to stop reading
>>1970021
>>yea grammer can be sited as flawed
>>>impaled my face on a stake

[Anonymous No.1970724]

>>1970712
>>1970712

What did you score on your SAT?

Need further validation of a true child prodigy on /sci/.

[Anonymous No.1970727]

>>1970712
U mad?

[parahacker No.1970731]

>>1970706

150'ish sounds about right.

I was 8 or 9, I think.

[Anonymous No.1970747]

>>1970731
>>1970731

Lol yeah. Marilyn vos Savant scored around 230 at that age. She scored 180's in adulthood on the titan test. Large enough difference to point towards regression, despite the Titan test being designed by and for prodigious cock lovers (inaccurate).

What did you score on your SAT? Would give a bit closer indicator of adult IQ than a test you took when you were 9.

[Anonymous No.1970756]

>>1970668

Why do you need a goal?

[parahacker No.1970758]

>>1970724

I scored 1420 on the SAT. 800 on the verbal, 620 on the math. Pretty average, really. Not supergenius territory.

In my defense I had a bug of some kind. a fever of 104 and I think I was experiencing time-lapses during it. But it was good enough I didn't bother retesting. Besides, at that point I liked the idea that evidence existed that I fell within normal ranges. It was... nice.

[Anonymous No.1970774]

>>1970758
Being normal is nice. As someone who probably exists at the top of the bell curve, I can attest to this. You're not burdened by the plight of humanity or questions you can never answer sufficiently.

[Anonymous No.1970781]

>>1970673
Wow. Troll, much?

[Anonymous No.1970782]

>>1970758

[Anonymous No.1970798]

/sci/: LOL PSYCHOLOGY IS A CARGO CULT SCIENCE
/sci/: BUT MY IQ IS SO MUCH HIGHER THAN YOURS AND STUFF

[parahacker No.1970807]

But I want to add something else. I'm very /socially/ aware. I like hypernotice things about other people, and I can't turn it off.

It's different from the things the tests test for. There are some 'EQ' tests floating around now, but they're in the baby stages of real science.

But intelligence is funny. There are trade offs. There's: what you percieve; what you connect together; and what you remember. And these three things work differently in different contexts, so someone who percieves spacial distances really well in wide open spaces doesn't percieve them as well in confined areas.

So really, IQ tests are for shit, basically.

But I *do* have problems relating to people who miss cues I get all the time. And when I get them, I forget the cues that they're still on, which means it's actually like anti-intelligence, kind of. With some training I can function pretty well, but I used to come off like an idiot savant common-sense-wise. Information overload.

[parahacker No.1970837]

>>1970781

Not a troll. But if I start throwing terms like 'Godel's Incompleteness Theorem' and how the Axiom of Choice is a fucking retarded concept, then I'd defeat the point of letting OP discover these things on their own. Oh wait, I just did that. Still not a troll, tho. Just answering the OP's question fairly.

Also, these captchas have been getting really grody and unreadable lately...

[Anonymous No.1970861]

>>1970774
>my face when I have existential crises errryday.

[Anonymous No.1970870]

>>1970861

>mfw Africans evade such predicaments due to their insatiable love for violence and "dat booty".

[parahacker No.1970896]

>>1970774

At the top on the x axis or the y axis? Heh.

Really, the biggest thing is how having a big number changes how other people treat you. Or at least how it did when I was a kid. Teachers would single me out. There were... subtleties, like if I started talking, other people would stop, and if I said something stupid then there'd be a BIG reaction to it. As if I'd broken a sacred trust or something. I'm really only describing the tip of the iceberg here... maybe some people do better with it, but I don't think my folks were ready to handle things right.

[Anonymous No.1970923]

This depresses me because I'm a high school dropout failure who can't even interact with people.

I know that I'll never amount to anything, I know that it's impossible for me to change the world of science good.

Humanity just looks at me I'm like worthless, which I pretty much am.

I wish I was a genus, I wish I wasn't below average at everything I do ;_;

[Anonymous No.1970943]

>>1970923

If you were hopelessly stupid you wouldn't be able to type this.

So you're a dropout. So were like half the Forbes list. They do alright.

I smell troll.

[Anonymous No.1970960]

Taking an IQ test as an accurate measure of intelligence isn't something a very intelligent person would do.

[Anonymous No.1970985]

>>1970923
Being a dropout says very little about your intelligence. Similarly, posting on 4chan claiming to be a genius says absolutely nothing about your intelligence. At least you're making an attempt to be honest with yourself. A lot of people can't do that.

[Anonymous No.1970997]

>>1970870
I'm african, and I daily feel the searing dual-sting of a persistant existential crisis and an unquenchable desire for _dat ass_...

[Anonymous No.1971043]

Personally I feel I'm in the sweet spot (110-115 IQ max) of being smart enough to succeed fairly well in our modern-day knowledge economy, affording me a comfortable lifestyle and the other attendant benefits, but dumb enough simply to accept the world as it is, happy to play by its rules without too much question.

Feels pretty good man. What does that sky-high IQ really bring to your life?

[Anonymous No.1971050]

is this high? I doubt this online shit test is even reliable.

[Anonymous No.1971062]

>>1971043

Stomach ulcers, in my case.

[Anonymous No.1971072]

>>1971050
I got 159 on an online IQ test a friend asked me to try a few years ago. Most online IQ tests are selling a product, and they know you're more likely to buy if they tell you you're smart. Scores are inflated out the ass. IQ really doesn't mean much on the high end anyway.

[Anonymous No.1971074]

>>1971050
That is one of the most retarded IQ tests ever. Doesn't it make you do WORD SCRAMBLE problems? That shit is not IQ related.

[Anonymous No.1971084]

lol

[Anonymous No.1971092]

I like this IQ test: http://iqtest.dk/main.swf
I didn't have time for a couple problems on my first try, but I got 100% on the second. It's pretty fun, and some of them really make you think.

[Anonymous No.1971095]

>>1971043
I wouldn't know. The average college grad has an IQ of 115. I am about as average a college kid as you can get, so I'm in the same boat as you, and I am in no fear of this boat capsizing.

[Anonymous No.1971102]

Hey...a toast to normality. May we do as much good and as little evil as possible with our meager intellects.

Cheers!

[Anonymous No.1971104]

>>1971043

[Anonymous No.1971119]

>>1969973


>The poor, the addicts, bankers etc should be removed from society as they take from the whole without providing to it anything. It takes energy and food to keep a homeless man alive.

you are a fucking disgrace to the human race.

[Anonymous No.1971131]

>>1969973
I bet you don't associate yourself with the Tea Party, but you should. You'd make friends easily with your Social Darwinist bullshit, just don't tell them it's Social Darwinism. Evolution isn't one of their favorite concepts.

[Anonymous No.1971142]

ITT: /sci/ has a big brain-dick contest.
You know what I think is stupid? Thinking that intelligence is quantifiable. I don't think I've ever taken an IQ test outside of when I was quite young. I think I'm intelligent, people around me think I'm intelligent but none of that actually means anything. True intelligence seems to be how well you can express insight and what conclusions you can come to about the world around you. If you are fully capable of understanding and forming strong solid conclusions about the world around you then nothing realistically separates you from other people of "high" intelligence. If you are capable of utilizing your critical thinking then who gives a fuck what number a test assigns to you?

[Anonymous No.1971148]

>>1971142
You're just mad because you didn't score high on an IQ test. When the technocracy becomes real, you will be sterilized first.

[Anonymous No.1971149]

>>1971142
Also, to gloat "high IQ scores" shows a serious lack of wisdom if nothing else, modesty is a virtue and to assume superiority because you completed a knowledge based test seems rather dim.

[Anonymous No.1971153]

>>1971148
Actually I think I scored around 140, but as I stated, I find it all to be irrelevant. The substance of your argument helps to prove my point.

[Anonymous No.1971158]

>>1971153
Wow, that's pretty high. Do you support the destruction of price tyranny?

[Anonymous No.1971159]

>>1970673

no wonder trying to work sense of a meaningless science. why dont you try something that actually exists like physics or engineering, you know, something actually useful?.

[Anonymous No.1971166]

>>1971158

not him but if you mean the tyranny of a ps3 costing 299 in the us and 3500 here then yes,.

[Anonymous No.1971186]

>>1971153
IQ tests are just an imperfect attempt to quantify intelligence. IQ doesn't define intelligence, but it's the best measure we have as far as I'm aware. It's stupid to brag about or define yourself by an IQ score, but those with high IQs are usually more insightful and contribute more than those with lower IQs.

[Anonymous No.1971196]

>>1971186
Which is why the world would be better if we sterilized everyone under an IQ of 116.

[Anonymous No.1971199]

>>1971196
Completely agreed.

[Anonymous No.1971203]

>>1971199
Sorry, but that means you have t go.

[Anonymous No.1971207]

>>1971196

>But that is less efficient and therefore stupider than applying them as forced labor. THINK, MR. GENYUS!

[Anonymous No.1971211]

>>1971203
It's not like I'll ever breed anyway.

[Anonymous No.1971213]

>>1971196

babbys first /sci/ troll attempt

[Anonymous No.1971215]

>>1971211
You were circumcised ;_;

[Anonymous No.1971218]

>>1971207
We'll have uncut robots to do our work for us because we're smart enough to make robots.

[Anonymous No.1971223]

>>1971215
Fortunately not. However, my neckbeard and lack of social skills render my foreskin or lack thereof moot.

[Anonymous No.1971224]

>>1971199
>>1971196

Not practical. It's foolish to set a dead limit on an inaccurate reading. One may score 116 on one test, yet 125 on another of the same standard deviation.

Besides, the Jews would turn of the "humility chips" that are put into African American brains in youth.

They'd go from shouting "DAS RACISS" and occasionally performing rape to becoming hyper-destructive savages that are void of even bordering a conscious mind.

Imagine if suddenly millions of rabid tigers were unleashed upon America.

[Anonymous No.1971227]

>>1971207
We can still use them as labor after they've been sterilized. They simply won't be able to breed.

[Anonymous No.1971233]

>>1971224

Why did I even type out that latter part? Perhaps it was because I was lurking /new/ before I came to /sci/.

[Anonymous No.1971245]

>>1971224
Those who failed to score above a 116 on an IQ test could be allowed the chance to become part of the intellectual elite by demonstrating an understanding of science and rational thinking or a useful skill.

[Anonymous No.1971249]

Hurr guys I have an IQ of 180
The masses are so ignorant lolololololol
I'm so smart hurrr

[Anonymous No.1971254]

>>1971249
>Hurr guys I have an IQ of 180
Considering that you're making fun of those with high IQs, I doubt it.
>The masses are so ignorant lolololololol
True.
>I'm so smart hurrr
See point 1.

[Anonymous No.1971259]

>>1971249

I Have An iQ of 200 DUrperdurrr

U MUST DIE!!! HUR

[Anonymous No.1971261]

IQ is at best a guess at a person's potential, and does not guarantee achievement in the least.

[Anonymous No.1971266]

>>1971259

but wait, i have an iq of 240

i must destroy the human race and create an entire new species cloning my perfect self.

i will be the new god.

yes.

[Anonymous No.1971275]

>>1971227

>Fair enough, but still implying the tests facilitating evaluation of the brain are based on a full, thorough understanding of the aforementioned organ. Seriously, how the fuck does that shit work? NOBODY NOS.

[Anonymous No.1971279]

>>1971259
Hurr lol yeah I was joking.
My IQ is really 220 lolololol.
Didn't want to appear too superior HURRR
Your IQ is shit eh?

[Anonymous No.1971288]

Guiz my iq be 300 lol
We should sterralize da masses HURR DURR!

[Anonymous No.1971291]

Why would you want to kill stupid people? It's not their fault they were born stupid.

[Anonymous No.1971296]

wait what if we sterilize the higher iqs, then we will get rid of racism!

for humanity!

[Anonymous No.1971303]

It would seem that IQ is only good for ego masturbation, as demonstrated by this thread.

[Anonymous No.1971310]

If everyone with an IQ under 116 was sterilized, the birthrate would plummet. The population of the world would begin to decline at a significant rate. This isn't a bad thing, but I wouldn't want humanity to die out altogether.

[Anonymous No.1971314]

People who advocate for sterilization seem to misunderstand the basic premises of natural selection. To put it crudely, it's survival of the fittest. Survival of those most likely to breed and raise those children to breed when they reach adulthood and so on and so forth.

It's not survival of the smartest at all. If anything, super genius is a barrier to reproduction. When you question the axioms upon which existence rests, you're probably not going to care if you shave or put on a few pounds. This can make dating a struggle, or at least more of a struggle than it already is.

[Anonymous No.1971680]

bump

[Anonymous No.1972734]

>>1971680
>mfw saged bump

[Anonymous No.1972746]

"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination." -Einstein

I'll just leave this here...

[Anonymous No.1972759]

>>1971314

Survival of the fittest? Thats not how evolution works. Its survival of those who reproduce the most. Thats hardly what I would call the fittest in modern society.

[Anonymous No.1972761]

>>1972734

Way to necro a thread, faggot.

[Anonymous No.1972792]

I was tested when I was about 8, and My IQ was measured as 132.

That fact and a quarter will get me a cup of coffee.

[Anonymous No.1972801]

I have an IQ of 90..
But i love science it interests me a lot.

[Anonymous No.1972834]

My I.Q/powerlevel is OVER 9000!!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.1972969]

The nervous system is responsible for our successful interaction with our environment and is an integral part of life such that without it there would be no consciousness. A very simple but profound insight.

It seems likely that we live in a deterministic universe; that is, time is a function of all matter in the universe and is not of independent design as Newton postulated. The consequence is that although we have a fairly good grasp on what drives the universe and can predict outcomes, build computers, cars; we are still missing a unification of ideas. While modern science expects the atom and its subunits to be the building blocks we are ultimately guessing as to the nature of things; a platonic ideal.

Another interesting insight is that humans each have an independent view of the universe as governed by its brain structure. This means that although we categorize ourselves 'human' we are all constructs in the fabric of the universe such that we could both be considered isolated from one another and at the same time an arbitration of the same universal sheet. If you do not see somebody elses point of view it's because you have a different chemical make-up. Both opinions may be considered correct; although the person we are most likely to follow are the ones with the model which leads to the greatest success in dealing with the world.

[Anonymous No.1973021]

160IQ here
the most profound thing I've ever learned is that cp is good!

[Anonymous No.1973043]

>>1970033
If I enjoy talking with them, they're probably intelligent.

[Anonymous No.1973062]

>>1973043
That just means they share similar thoughts to you.
Such a bias method to determine intelligence != true intelligence.

[Anonymous No.1973116]

>>1972761
>mfw saged necro

[Anonymous No.1973130]

167 I see lulz.

[Anonymous No.1973142]

just bear in mind; that if an infinite number of monkeys took an infinite number of IQ tests some of them would cap the test

[Anonymous No.1973158]

>>1973142
yes but that implies iq tests don't measure ones cognitive abilities

[Anonymous No.1973185]

Richard Feynman scored a 125 on an IQ test, yet he was winning national mathematical competitions and doing advanced mathematics at a very young age. That is enough proof to me that IQ test are meaningless unless you are testing for retardation. Feynman was essentially a prodigy whose real IQ would be at genius levels. IQ test do not test well for people that have anxiety, ADHD etc. There are "double gifted" individuals that score low on IQ test, r much lower than the otherwise would. "Double gifted" means someone with an above average IQ with some sort of learning disability. So a person may have an "IQ" of 140 and score a 100 due to some kind of disability. You can't test for that... Also, people like Einstein were thought to be retarded. Secretly Einstein's parents thought they had a mentally retarded child. He would do weird things like 1) Not talk 2) Hide under a table as a child 3) Go in the woods for extended periods of time 4) Answer questions at an extremely slow pace 5) Get kicked out of class due to his slowness and unconventional behavior during gymnasium. No one would have thought Einstein was smart if he didn't have the balls to publish.

[Anonymous No.1973212]

>>1973185
/THREAD

[Anonymous No.1973223]

>>1973185
IQ tests can be primitive in that they only test a few of the qualities relating to cognition and perceived intelligence in a societal habitat.

Brain scans and specialised tests are of course a better measure of iq. Perhaps even a lower score on one test can lead to a fascinating insight which otherwise would have gone unnoticed.

[Anonymous No.1973230]

>>1973223

Brain scans are primitive enough to not be accurate estimations of cognition.

[Anonymous No.1973236]

>>1973230

Well, I'll add onto this.

They can be accurate in assessing cognition, but one must scrupulously examine the brain through various scanning.

Also, specialized testing are good estimates of specific functionality of certain aspects of cognition.

[Anonymous No.1973238]

>>1973223
I never been formally tested with an IQ test, but others expected that I was bright. Once, I became very sick and had to be hospitalized. A neurologist scanned my brain for any abnormalities. After the scan he told my mother that he could tell I was highly intelligent. My mother told me this after I was hospitalized and well. I would have asked him how he could tell that, but I never had the chance. So, since you brought it up, how can brain scans tell such things?

[Anonymous No.1973242]

>>1973230
Yes, the brain is largely unknown in its functions.
Scans will reveal percentage of activated brain regions but will not necessarily say how well the neuropathways are put together

[Anonymous No.1973245]

>>1973238

Amount of grey matter in different parts of the brain, electrical activity (somewhat, though it is a more valid indication of psychological state), and perhaps general brain structure.

[Anonymous No.1973250]

>>1973238
"General human intelligence appears to be based on the volume of gray matter tissue in certain regions of the brain, UC Irvine College of Medicine researchers have found in the most comprehensive structural brain-scan study of intelligence to date.

The study also discovered that because these regions related to intelligence are located throughout the brain, a single “intelligence center,” such as the frontal lobe, is unlikely.

Dr. Richard Haier, professor of psychology in the Department of Pediatrics and long-time human intelligence researcher, and colleagues at UCI and the University of New Mexico used MRI to obtain structural images of the brain in 47 normal adults who also took standard intelligence quotient tests. The researchers used a technique called voxel-based morphometry to determine gray matter volume throughout the brain which they correlated to IQ scores. Study results appear on the online version of NeuroImage.

Previous research had shown that larger brains are weakly related to higher IQ, but this study is the first to demonstrate that gray matter in specific regions in the brain is more related to IQ than is overall size. Multiple brain areas are related to IQ, the UCI and UNM researchers have found, and various combinations of these areas can similarly account for IQ scores. Therefore, it is likely that a person’s mental strengths and weaknesses depend in large part on the individual pattern of gray matter across his or her brain.

“This may be why one person is quite good at mathematics and not so good at spelling, and another person, with the same IQ, has the opposite pattern of abilities,” Haier said. "

http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/002244.html

[Anonymous No.1973260]

>>1971119
Could you explain why? I'm not advocating eugenics or killing them or anything, I'm saying the jobs that are trulynot important in this age should be removed. And efforts should be made to give the homeless jobs where they can work for something, even if its just manual labor.
>>1971131
I'm not advocating social darwinism, I'm saying people that are doing x should know why they are doing x and what comes of it, usually holding civilization up, sometimes moving it forward, sometimes holding it down. I'm not saying scientists should get more rights or anything of that nature. They are just the minority that moves forward

[Anonymous No.1973371]

After wasting my time reading half of this thread, I find it miraculous that there are ~a dozen people out of only a few dozen more posting in this thread reporting an IQ three or four standard deviations above the mean.

Fucking MIRACULOUS.

You kids are a bunch of fags

[Anonymous No.1973743]

>>1973371
>mfw MIRACULOUS