>he thinks IQ doesn't correlate with overall success in life

File: 18 KB, 352x352, 1315735454801.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 08:46:12 No.3937577 [Reply] [Original]

>he thinks IQ doesn't correlate with overall success in life

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 08:47:12 No.3937581 there is a strange weakly negative correlation at the upper ends of IQ scores

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 08:48:12 No.3937583 >overall success in life what's the metric for that?

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 08:48:12 No.3937589 CUT MY LIFE INTO PIZZA THIS IS MY PLASTIC FORK OVEN BAKING, HEAVY BREATHING DON'T GIVE A FUCK IF IT'S CARBS THAT I'M EATING

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 08:49:12 No.3937590 Your right I don't. I know complete idiots that are doing quite well and very intelligent folk who are really struggling. Don't we all?

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 08:50:12 No.3937595 File: 12 KB, 283x255, 1317137508657.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3937590 >uses anecdotal evidence to support his claims No wonder you don't see the big picture.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 08:51:12 No.3937598 >>3937590 That line of thinking is characteristic of a low IQ.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 08:53:12 No.3937606 >>3937590 >Your Clearly a low-IQ-denizen

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 08:53:12 No.3937609 >>3937577 >posts claim with no evidence

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 08:54:12 No.3937612 OP is correct but we all know correlation is not causation

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:15:12 No.3937663

>>3937609
I'm sure you can google more on your own.

>Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life
>Linda S. Gottfredson
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289697900143

>Intelligence Predicts Health and Longevity, but Why?
>Linda S. Gottfredson 1 and Ian J. Deary 2
http://www.psy.ed.ac.uk/people/iand/Gottfredson%20(2004)%20Curr%20Dir%20Psychol%20Sci%20intelligence
%20predicts%20longevity%20why.pdf

>Intelligence and educational achievement
>Deary IJ, Strand S, Smith P, Fernandes C (2007)
http://www.elsevier.com/authored_subject_sections/S05/S05_357/top/intel.pdf

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:17:12 No.3937671 145 here. I"m doing nothing with my life. you are wrong.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:18:12 No.3937677 >>3937671 >doesn't understand why using anecdotal evidence in a debate makes one look foolish

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:19:12 No.3937679 >>3937671 >states alleged IQ without giving the standard deviation used Nope, you're probably 90-110 std 15.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:20:12 No.3937686 >>3937677 >dismissing something because it's "anecdotal" ooo you so smart. soooo smart. comeback when you have a real argument

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:22:12 No.3937691 >>3937612 this this this OP is a faggot

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:31:12 No.3937722 >overall success As some other anon said, what is the metric of this? Income? Also correlation =/= causation. If you don't have the willpower or the right mindset to put that high IQ to use, its basically useless.

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:33:12 No.3937726

>>3937612
>>3937691

1. OP states that IQ correlates with overall success in life.
2. You two attack OP's claim by stating that correlation is not causation.
3. At no point did OP claim IQ is the driving force behind success. He states that IQ correlates with success.

What you two are doing is known as the straw man attack which is "based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position". "To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position." [stolen from Wikipedia]

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:34:12 No.3937731

>>3937686
You are a moron. In the scientific community ancedotal evidence is the lowest form of evidence as people who give ancedotal evidence (gp's, experts) are subject to bias and random chance. Find a random controlled trial that supports your statement and not using your statement as the only source of evidence.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:34:12 No.3937733 >>3937722 see >>3937663 for example. Health, longevity, academic success.

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:38:12 No.3937745

>>3937733
I'm just wondering how happy they are?

All those factors should point out that they're happy, yet, people can have high income, health and all those other factors and be miserable.

In my personal opinion, I think that's what matters in the end.

However, I highly doubt that most are miserable. It will just be an interesting experiment.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:39:12 No.3937748 I've never met anyone with a sub 130 IQ, yet that's supposed to be like 90th percentile. Is EVERYONE lying?

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:40:12 No.3937751

>>3937731
>lowest form of evidence

OOOO where is this "evidence power meter" I wanna smoke some too

>subject to bias and random chance
everything is. whats your point dumbass?

>find a random controlled trial
my life is a trial.

>using your statement as the only source of evidence
uh oh and your statement as a attempt to "counter" my point is somehow without flaw? talk about being a hyprocrit

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:41:12 No.3937753 >>3937726 >attack nope. merely qualify. and ad hominem because OP is always a faggot

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:41:12 No.3937754 >>3937748 I think so. People who really do have IQ over 130 (99th percentile) shut up and keep it to themselves, unless they're also assholes. Only people who score below average shove their exaggerated IQ to other people's anuses.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:42:12 No.3937759 >>3937751 http://www.mh.org.au/royal_melbourne_hospital/www/353/files/pyramidopt.jpg There you go. I'm not trying to disprove you i'm just saying that your opinion is scientifically invalid however true it may be.

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:43:12 No.3937764

>>3937748
I think I've never taken an IQ test except for maybe one time.

Its was to get into the gifted program at my school and I scored in the 98 percentile. Yet, the gifted program was filled with retards so I don't know how valid the test was in the end or if it even was an IQ test.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:44:12 No.3937766 >>3937748 >>3937754 Just to clarify things: 99th percentile: IQ135 (std15), IQ137( std16), IQ156 (std24) 90th percentile: IQ120 (std15), IQ121 (std16), IQ132 (std24)

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:45:12 No.3937771 >>3937759 >random picture from some corner of the internet nice citation bro. you got anything else?

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:46:12 No.3937772 >>3937754 >unless they're also assholes Or score barely above average and think they're geniuses.

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:49:12 No.3937780

>>3937771
There are hundereds of similar pictures, charts and websites similar to that one. I'm not making stuff up, when a researcher reviews a study or sets out to make there own they use one of these tables. Obviously they will choose a type of study that best suites there goals but the study they will choose will always use the highest level of evidence possible.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:50:12 No.3937782 File: 408 KB, 1250x1768, IQchart_01.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] IQ percentiles, scores and societies.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 09:58:12 No.3937800 All leaders have an average iq.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 10:05:12 No.3937807 >>3937800 >[citation needed]

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 10:12:12 No.3937830 >>3937807 Sorry. Most of the leaders have an average iq, just like most of the people have an average iq [1]. [1] Evidence.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 10:13:12 No.3937834 >>3937830 That like saying most nobel laureates have an average IQ because most people have an average IQ

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 10:14:12 No.3937836 All the really dumb people I know seem to have opportunity fall into their lap or have people take care of them. It's bullshit

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 10:17:12 No.3937844 >>3937834 yes, that's why IQ doesn't correlate with overall success in life.

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 10:22:12 No.3937862

Social Intelligence (also known as EQ) plays a much larger role in success, at least financially, than intelligence. Sure, your really high-iq citizens might make advancements in science and maths etc., but to gain success in a lot of areas of life you need to be able to talk to people, empathize, and make connections, something I myself tend to struggle at, meanwhile I've been pretty smart all my life with a desire to question things, read, create, learn, etc.
Observe the most wealthy or "successful" people you know. Talk to them. They may not always be the brightest but there is something else there and you'll realize it.

Now take my weak anecdotal evidence and interpret it however you like

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 10:22:12 No.3937863 File: 23 KB, 330x357, 1314816105772.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >you will never drink sherry and eat cookies with tesla and da vinci in the giga society

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 10:23:12 No.3937869 For a large sample it has a clear correlation, inferring success in life based on IQ, and vice-versa, for a single person, is not really valid tho

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 10:24:12 No.3937871 File: 12 KB, 358x238, ds.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] ITT: double digiters who can't visualize IQ as one factor among many that lead to success

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 10:25:12 No.3937873 Why don't you ask Chris Langdon?

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 10:29:12 No.3937884 >>3937871 >single-dititer cannot see IQ as the key factor behind all those other factors

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 11:38:12 No.3938087 File: 33 KB, 408x597, 1198gottfred_table.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 11:44:12 No.3938096 File: 140 KB, 917x761, 1318609327346.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 11:48:12 No.3938106 >>3938096 >no standard deviations >no context for "short", "long", "fast", "slow", "intermediate", etc. fail troll is fail

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 11:50:12 No.3938111 > needing to take an IQ test to tell you how intelligent you are. so you didnt know beforehand? intredasting.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 11:56:12 No.3938127 >>3937577 'Smartest' man in the world is a bouncer. Your argument is invalid.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 11:57:12 No.3938129 File: 36 KB, 366x334, hoorh.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3937884 >he thinks being born to subsistence farmers in the democratic republic of the congo is due to IQ

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 11:57:12 No.3938130 My IQ is 173. Fuck your shit, I'm still sitting alone in a small room with no prospects and no cash.

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 11:57:12 No.3938131

>>3937884
>>3937871

>implying that IQ test scores aren't a way of measuring how intelligent you are by the test's standards

Think about it, I personally have never scored the exact same score twice in a row with different tests. Some of the tests actually favor people who had certain information drilled into them that others didn't.

It's a way of measuring intelligence, but it doesn't define how intelligent you are. It's just the result of a measurement.

Not even a very accurate one at that. My dad for example scores 2 points higher on average than me (127) yet he keeps making stupid decisions such as loaning money to buy shit he doesn't need. He KNOWS he doesn't need an extra motorcycle or that shiny new phone and according to the tests he's supposedly smarter than me but he's completely oblivious to a lot of real life situations.

I am saying that IQ is important but it's only an indication of how intelligent you are. It doesn't automatically make you smart. It just means you do well on IQ tests.

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 11:58:12 No.3938135

IQ does correlate with overall success.

However, this doesn't tell you anything about the individual. Statistics only provide you with a likelihood, but no guarantees. Someone who is successful is more likely to be intelligent, that doesn't imply however that he necessarily is. Someone who is unsuccessful is more likely to be less intelligent, but that doesn't mean that everyone who is unsuccessful is.

I'm somewhat sceptical about these IQ societies, especially these ultra-high IQ societies. This seems like a scam to me. I don't think it's possible estimate an IQ that surpasses the average to such extends with reasonable accuracy.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 11:59:12 No.3938137 Now shows us your face when luck determines overall success in life as we have little to no control over the decisions that affect out lives.

>>	Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs Sat, Oct 22, 2011 11:59:12 No.3938138 File: 52 KB, 575x415, ghd_billmurray_1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] ITT: intelligence is subjective, stupidity is objective

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 11:59:12 No.3938139 File: 30 KB, 281x266, laughing 4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3937577 "Hey Dick, this guy thinks it was my IQ that got me the job of President for 8 years!"

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:01:12 No.3938148 File: 249 KB, 371x470, fw.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3938130 Sounds like your IQ is narcissistc personality disorder

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:02:12 No.3938151 Looks like OP took an internet IQ test for the 5th time and scored above 120. Good job OP!

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:02:52 No.3938150 >>3938096 >niggers are shit-tier news at 11

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:03:12 No.3938155 >define success

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:04:12 No.3938156 >>3938139 >>3938139 Bush is a lot smarter than he lets on.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:07:12 No.3938172 OP you are so naive and clueless about life. Who you know is far more important than what you know. This is how retards end up running mega-corporations and becoming presidents of countries.

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:07:12 No.3938173
File: 104 KB, 800x600, 1308782567735.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>He doesn't understand that the ONLY key to success is charisma and confidence

Seriously, EVERYTHING ELSE PALES IN COMPARISON to these two attributes. Intelligence doesn't mean shit if oyu have no confidence, thus no motivation.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:07:12 No.3938174 >>3938156 I concur. Bush isn't an orator But that doesn't mean he's not smart. That another thing how well do IQ tests account for public presentation? Does intelligence correlate with this in any way?

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:09:12 No.3938179 Bush isn't stupid, he just has some kind of mild dyslexia or something that occasionally makes him fumble during speeches.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:09:12 No.3938181 >>3938173 Plus you'll get more chicks than if you solely relied on intelligence. And success is ultimately judged by frequency of sexual intercourse.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:11:12 No.3938184 >>3938179 That would be dsyphasia then. Really, I thought it was an act. You can tell when he's being serious and when he's not.

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:13:12 No.3938188

>>3938181
This. It proves how old you are if you still believe that IQ is the only important thing in life. Because most of the time, it just brings misery and depression from your insane superiority complex.

I just wish i was confident and charismatic, i'd rather be a dumb meathead than what i am now. I never used to believe them when they said that money and intelligence aren't important, and that happiness is. I always used to refute that logic as though it was them trying to compensate or make up excuses. But now i know that happiness is the only thing to achieve in life. Nothing else matters.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:19:13 No.3938203 >>3938188 >strawman No one has claimed that IQ is the only important thing in life. Please, if you're going to trying to appear an adult, don't make elementary logical mistakes.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:20:12 No.3938206 >>3938188 >strawman No one has claimed that IQ is the only important thing in life. Please, if you're going to try to appear an adult, don't make elementary logical mistakes.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:23:12 No.3938213 >>3938184 *dysphasia typo

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:30:12 No.3938232

>>3938184
>>3938213
Maybe that is the cause, regardless I think we can rule out low IQ. He was a machiavellian sociopath and an absolute master at manipulation that we couldn't even hope to match if we spent our lives meticulously researching every aspect of this field.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:53:12 No.3938315 File: 61 KB, 916x1333, IQ-jobs.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:57:12 No.3938335 >he thinks IQ isn't largely inheritable >he thinks IQ isn't a valid, though not as accurate as stated, measure of one's ability to use logical, deductive reasoning to solve problems

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 13:05:12 No.3938366

>>3938315
They should so something like this but investigating specific companies and universities rather than just overall professions.

I bet top-5 universities will have a mean IQ of professors that's closer to 130, and companies like Jane Street and Goldman Saachs will have a mean IQ of employees that's way higher than "finance, insurance and real estate Occs"

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 13:20:12 No.3938423 File: 88 KB, 1280x960, mensa result.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >IQ above 99th percentile (>135 sd15) >master's degree >corporate career job >still browse 4chan every day

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 13:23:12 No.3938427 >>3938423 >135 >masters degree GTFO, retardfag. You're ruining our 180 average and you don't even have a PhD.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 13:31:12 No.3938454 File: 50 KB, 411x550, work.6209211.3.flat,550x550,075,f.isabelle-the-anxious-wait.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3938427 >implying my presence alone doesn't bump the /sci/ average up by several points

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 13:35:12 No.3938469 >implying any of you can match me, who has beaten photosynthesis and created zero-light horticulture.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 13:36:12 No.3938470 >>3938423 Hur har du tagit en master om du är född 90? skillat

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 13:36:12 No.3938473

I've always felt that IQ does correlate with overall success to a point.

Once you get to a point where you're so intelligent that everything comes so easy to you it causes you to become lazy. For example I never had to do ANY work in public school and my first 2 years of college. I would just go to class stoned and take a nap. I would get A's consistently. Then my final 2 years of college were extremely difficult and I struggled as I had never developed any sort of study habits.

This would explain some of the negative correlation as said by this
>>3937581

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 13:37:12 No.3938474 >>3938470 Stop it. We speak english here, not viking.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 13:46:12 No.3938504 >>3938474 non-viking speaking peasant race detected

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 13:47:12 No.3938509 >>3938473 I'm pretty sure thats not the correlation. The upper ends hes talking about are probably the people that don't have to try for those last two years in college either.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 13:50:12 No.3938514 i blame the jews

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 13:52:12 No.3938521 >>3938423 >master's degree >corporate career job correlation disproved

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 13:54:12 No.3938527 >she thinks

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 14:01:12 No.3938547 Post some evidence/studies by well-respected sources that state it absolutely does...

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 14:03:12 No.3938554

its amazing that some people on /sci/ actually manage to delude themselves into thinking that IQ tests don't correlate with high intelligence, or that intelligence doesn't correlate with financial success. Its like basic common fucking sense that both of those are true.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 14:23:12 No.3938587 File: 16 KB, 360x380, 1318753669955.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3938521

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 14:32:12 No.3938604 >>3937577 EQ > IQ it's pretty much proven in our world social intelligence is what lands you jobs, success with women, relationships, promotions, etc

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 14:33:12 No.3938606 File: 22 KB, 537x487, 1319287239510.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3938604

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 14:36:12 No.3938624 >>3938587 >implying that smart people go into boring shit like business instead of actually using their intelligence

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 14:37:12 No.3938630 File: 15 KB, 287x277, 1316294959973.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3938624 >implying implications

>>	uMad? !!6km7O/DzFvQ Sat, Oct 22, 2011 14:41:12 No.3938641 Everyone is mad

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 15:07:12 No.3938712

>>3938423 here.
It's fucking annoying when having random discussions with "normal" people and you basically start with sentence 1, omit sentence 2 because it's a given and jump straight to sentence 3 and bam, you lost them. You can just see it in their eyes that they didn't get what you just said. They couldn't make the connection between sentences 1 and 3 and now you have to go back and speak sentence 2 out loud and explain it all again.

But it's a real pleasure to have a discussion with someone of your 'caliber' who thinks the same way and the conversation just starts to flow. Both of you moving at an equal pace, neither of you getting bored, both getting something out of it.

I once met a guy who was obviously smarter than me at a party and we ended up in this kind of flow discussion. I don't even remember what we were talking about, but once we were done about 20 minutes later, 5 people had gathered around the kitchen table we were sitting at and just stared at us smirking. None of them had been able to keep up with our discussion.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 15:16:12 No.3938736 >>3938624 You're meant to be over the age of 18 before browsing 4chan.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 15:18:12 No.3938745 >>3938736 enjoy working in an cubicle all day and never using your brain

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 15:28:12 No.3938783 >>3938712 two autistic kids conversing generally draws a crowd.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 15:33:12 No.3938805 File: 14 KB, 364x336, condescending, patronising laugh, smile.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3938474 >not viking.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 15:34:12 No.3938812 >>3938783 >cwc and ulillillia discussing sonichu

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 15:38:12 No.3938833 File: 130 KB, 396x381, 1315497862005.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3938805 >condescending, patronising laugh, smile.jpg

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 15:42:12 No.3938856 >>3938833 What's the issue?

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 16:17:12 No.3938987 I wonder how MBTI personality types correlate with IQ? Found only some shady table with a sample size of 16. Not even worth posting.

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 16:23:12 No.3939019

I'm at a 139 and I suffer from severely debilitating anxiety.

That's probably from my shit childhood though and not my potential, but that also brings up the idea that I might have been extraordinarily average if not for those obscurities in my childhood development.

Too many variables for a meaningful analysis. Not enough data for a meaningful analysis.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 16:28:12 No.3939053 Anyone play around with this? http://brainworkshop.sourceforge.net/ It's a double N-back game based on this study: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2008/04/25/0801268105.abstract Scoring 65-75 now in two N-back mode. Shit's difficult.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 16:29:52 No.3939054 File: 38 KB, 508x595, obamashake.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >yfw intelligence can't be measured objectively because there's no standard for comparison >yfw the entire basis of your self-esteem is an illusory abstraction

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 16:30:12 No.3939062 File: 29 KB, 396x400, 2093_1273102265554.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3939054

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 16:32:12 No.3939068 >>3939053 87% first try

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 16:32:12 No.3939070 >IQ of 142 Wechsler-S.D 15

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 16:35:12 No.3939082 >>3939070 >[picture needed]

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 16:38:12 No.3939087 >>3939070 >wechsler So you picked that word from >>3937782 and then then picked a nice large number? Pro-tip: there's no "Wechsler" scale or test, the test you probably wanted to refer to is WAIS-IV. Try again.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 16:39:12 No.3939095 >>3939082 It's still in my mother's possession. I'll have to contact her.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 16:43:12 No.3939116 >>3939087 http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Wechsler+Intelligence+Test I don't know the exact test name, but I recall wechsler. Butthurt?

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 16:48:12 No.3939140 File: 66 KB, 647x400, 1317196898141.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3939116 If you want to prove yourself, take iqout.com or iqtest.dk and post a screenshot. Surely you can get above 142 sd15 on either one.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 16:56:12 No.3939165 File: 42 KB, 484x484, 1267826129477.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3937577 >He thinks success correlates with overall happiness in life.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 16:57:12 No.3939167 >>3939165 >he can't read properly and projects his mental problems into other posters

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 17:15:12 No.3939233

>>3938712
I have to take this thread a step backwards and respond to this bullshit.

Knowledge is different from intelligence. A person can know a lot of things without being as capable as another person. A more intelligent person than you could get lost during your conversations if he isn't privy to the information you're referencing. This doesn't make him stupid, it just means he hasn't previously been exposed to the information and can't magically wave his hand and conjure up that particular piece of knowledge for his perusal. He needs to at least bust out a Smart Phone for that, but that would be rude to do mid-conversation.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 17:18:12 No.3939250 >>3939233 These conversations I referenced were general and required no specific knowledge. I know very well what intelligence is and what it is not. You simply missed my point, which is kind of ironic.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 17:20:12 No.3939260 >>3939165 >Thinks being unsuccessful will lead to happiness >Excuse to be a loser

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 17:23:12 No.3939264 >>3939165 I know that constant failure correlates with unhappiness so certain amount of success seems necessary.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:29:52 No.3939463 File: 168 KB, 407x379, 1319221091752.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >that feel when <110 apes pollute the collective gene pool

>>	Z !!dsx+Y0H3Zjm Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:31:12 No.3939475 >>3937577 Bush had an IQ of what, 80? He was the worlds mightiest man. High-IQ people don't get in positions of power, if that's your measure of "success."

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:34:12 No.3939491 >>3939475 >mindless blabber >filtered

>>	Sheikah !NKCqu160yw Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:37:12 No.3939502 >>3939475 >High-IQ people don't get into positions of power That just might be the most retarded thing I've heard all day.

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:38:12 No.3939505

>>3939250
>I know very well what intelligence is and what it is not. You simply missed my point...
Apparently you don't since you didn't include
>These conversations I referenced were general and required no specific knowledge.
in your first post or anything vaguely alluding to it. This is kind of important. You also allow no room for the possibility that the subject was not as general as you believe it to be. Without some specifics, you could very well just be under the delusion that your specific information is general knowledge.

I understand what you were going for, but your actual post says to me that you're just looking for an excuse to look down on people.

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:43:12 No.3939518

>>3939505
I'm sorry to sound arrogant, but someone of my intellect would never assume the discussions I referred to weren't generic in nature. That would defy the purpose of the entire post.

The fact that you cannot understand this only underlines my point.

You're a grade A example of the kind of person I was referring to. The kind of person who is tiring to speak with.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:45:12 No.3939522 Human height coorelates much higher with success (in all ways of life) then IQ

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:46:12 No.3939526 >>3939522 >[citation needed]

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:47:12 No.3939529 i think op is right the less iq you have the more success you have in life

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:47:52 No.3939528 >mfw i have 130 iq but im jobless, apathetic, and stays in basement of my mom's house

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:51:12 No.3939542 There are so many counterexamples in real life that OP must be a retard. The most important variable to achieve success is social skill

>>	Sheikah !NKCqu160yw Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:52:12 No.3939548 >>3939518 Oh, I bet you're a laugh a minute. I'm curious - what do you do?

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:56:12 No.3939556 >>3939548 I've said all I'm willing to say about myself in this thread. I'm not in the habit of leaving trails on the Internet traceable to my real-life persona.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:56:12 No.3939557 >IQ over 130 That's high? Neat, my sister is a genius.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:57:12 No.3939565 >>3939526 source : evolution & science

>>	Sheikah !NKCqu160yw Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:57:12 No.3939566 >>3939556 So you don't actually use your amazing intellect for anything? What a waste, eh?

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 18:58:12 No.3939568 >>3939566 >implying IQ = Intellect

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 19:01:12 No.3939580 >>3939568 >implying IQ != Intellect Quotient Congratulations, you're the dumbest person on this thread.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 19:02:12 No.3939582 >>3939580 >implying IQ measure intellect >implying you can quantify intelligence dohohohohoho

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 19:05:12 No.3939599 >>3939582 Trying to change the subject eh? That's basically an admission of defeat.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 19:06:12 No.3939602 >>3939599 the closest thing we have to quantifying intellect is g-factor and iq tests do not measure g-factor

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 19:07:12 No.3939612 File: 98 KB, 776x602, 1314816105773.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3939602

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 19:08:12 No.3939619 >>3939602 Whatever, I wasn't commenting on the validity of IQ to begin with.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 19:09:12 No.3939624 >>3939582 >implying I dont have 67 units of intelligence per square inch of brainmatter

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 19:10:12 No.3939631 File: 36 KB, 188x217, 1317141272482.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3939624 >2011 >inch

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 19:11:12 No.3939637 >>3939602 yeah well my percentile is 98% so suck all 4 of my dicks

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 19:12:12 No.3939639

>>3939518
If you had actually read my post, I mentioned that the information you believed to be general could, in fact, have been more specific than you thought.

As I said before, without any specifics there is no way for us here on the high seas of the internet to know whether or not your audience's confusion was due to actually not being able to follow a general knowledge conversation or whether it was because you have mistaken specific knowledge for general knowledge. It could also be that you made some logical leaps in your conversation that are not immediately apparent to anyone but you (and people who think like you) due to your thought process. Then there's the problem of defining General vs Specific knowledge in those niggling gray areas.

tl;dr: While I'm sure you're not stupid, your communication skills may be lacking.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 19:16:12 No.3939662 >>3939639 Alright.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 19:39:12 No.3939778 >>3939582 it's often possible to determine that something does not have intelligence

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 19:56:12 No.3939840 File: 25 KB, 461x338, 634e7cf3316898e2a2a7ef87baf59a26.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 19:57:12 No.3939842 >>3937583 >>3937583 >>3937583 >>3937583 >>3937583 >>3937583 >>3937583 >>3937583 trollthread/10

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 21:29:12 No.3940147

thinking that having a high IQ means you deserve to get a high quality of life is just another kind of sense of entitlement. No matter who you are, the moment your born the only thing you should take for granted is that eventually you lose everything, so do what you can and enjoy yourself but don't get all bent out of shape if things don't work out.

>>	Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 21:37:12 No.3940181 >>3937577 Uh, it doesn't really. Life experience does though, which can have such an effect on intelligence or IQ.

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 21:37:12 No.3940183
File: 215 KB, 500x639, girlgamer.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

On a macro level, yes. Populations with higher IQ tend to be more economically successful, even if the state they reside in may not be so well off (Chinese in Southeast Asia). On a micro level, no. Having a 200+ IQ does not mean you will be the richest person in the world.

Anonymous Sat, Oct 22, 2011 22:05:12 No.3940354

I got a friend of mine who's all miserable because he was a rhodes scholar and now he works at target. do you know who else he works with? Carlos Mendez. Starting first basemen for Baltimore in 2003. Carlos seems allot happier about it. he's a great guy.

>>	uMad? !!6km7O/DzFvQ Sat, Oct 22, 2011 22:26:12 No.3940486 You still mad

Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 02:09:12 No.3941456

The correlation that people are trying to study between high IQ and success in life(whatever it might be, it's a wide spectrum) is to some degree manipulated by ourselves. It is even mentioned in this thread by some people.

Namely that we test people at young age and cherry pick high IQ'ers for gifted children programs in the educational system. Not to mention when a parent(even a non-scholastic) is informed that their child has high IQ and is a prodigy/math wiz (take your pick) they become much more engaged in their child's academic life and more optimistic about its long term goals. In effect giving the child an outstanding foundation for adulthood.

Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 02:37:12 No.3941536

"he thinks IQ doesn't correlate with overall success in life"

Well, obviously low IQ couldn't correlate with overal success in life, since mental retardation usually requires caretakers and professional help.

So yes, IQ should correlate in the middle of the normal distribution with better overall success in life than in the lower bounds of mental retardation.

But in the higher bounds, IQ also correlates with problems of social adjustment. See the works of Lewis Terman, who did some longitudinal studies on gifted individuals, but played down the degree of social adjustment problems among the gifted. Some people re-analysed his statistics and drew a different conclusion: high IQ is correlated with more problems of social adjustment than normal IQ.

>>	Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 02:39:12 No.3941542 Go home. >>>/pol/

>>	Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 05:49:12 No.3941835 >>3941542 Discussion of intelligence is now politically incorrect? I never understood this deep-rooted hostility towards the idea of measurable intelligence. You're heading down a dangerous road when you start censoring scientific facts.

>>	uMad? !!6km7O/DzFvQ Sun, Oct 23, 2011 06:45:12 No.3941917 >>3941835 It's called leftism.

>>	Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 06:53:12 No.3941933 DEFINE IQ DEFINE SUCCESS IN LIFE

>>	Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 06:55:12 No.3941941 I have an average iq. I am the 99%

>>	Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 06:55:12 No.3941944 >>3941835 >measuring intelligence >scientific fact Haha.

>>	Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 06:55:12 No.3941945 >>3941933 Must be awful to live with a brain so foggy.

>>	Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 07:05:12 No.3941961 >success >he doesn't understand the differences in peoples utility functions.

Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 07:19:12 No.3941984

One could put it this way - IQ correlates heavily with intelligence and general aptitude, but that is not implying it is the cause of it. The causation is, however, largely irrelevant when deciding the validity of the IQ concept - because as long as the correlation is there, it remains a useful instrument. And the correlation has been proven time and again to be very high.

Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 07:20:12 No.3941987

>>3938712

This is a quote from a Mensa member talking about the exact same thing:

>The other members understand my way of thinking in a way I never really thought possible - I honestly didn't know what I was missing before experiencing it. It's like there's been this mental barrier between me and the rest of the world for all my life, and suddenly that barrier isn't there anymore. One of the things IQ correlates with is social interaction - people with similar IQs have a significantly easier time socializing with eachother than people with differing IQs. Although you may have completely different opinions and morals, and come to different conclusions, you share a common pattern in the way you think. You can understand their reasoning, and they can understand yours.

>>	Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 07:58:12 No.3942081 >he thinks IQ doesn't correlate with the amount of overall trolling in life.

Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 08:10:12 No.3942120

There is definitely a positive correlation, but high IQ definitely couldn't be considered to cause success. Height and attractiveness also have correlations with success. That doesn't mean someone is going to be successful just because they are 6'3", would probably just make it easier to be. The same goes for intelligence. Intelligence is nothing if you don't use it to your advantage.

>>	Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 08:41:12 No.3942227 File: 62 KB, 888x666, 1319048583100.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] You stupid fucks. There are many kinds of intelligence.

Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 08:46:12 No.3942242
File: 146 KB, 900x796, gf.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>3942227
IQ tests such as Raven's progressive matrices and the Figure Reasoning Test that many national Mensa chapters use measure fluid intelligence from which other forms of intelligence stem from.

>Fluid intelligence (Gf ) is a complex human ability that allows us to adapt our thinking to a new cognitive problem or situation (1). Gf is critical for a wide variety of cognitive tasks (2), and it is considered one of the most important factors in learning. Moreover, Gf is closely related to professional and educational success (3–6), especially in complex and demanding environments (7). There is considerable agreement that Gf is robust against influences of education and socialization, and it is commonly seen as having a strong hereditary component (2, 8, 9).

1. Carpenter PA, Just MA, Shell P (1990) What one intelligence test measures: A theoretical account of the processing in the Raven Progressive Matrices Test. Psychol Rev 97:404 – 431.
2. Gray JR, Thompson PM (2004) Neurobiology of intelligence: Science and ethics. Nat Rev Neurosci 5:471– 482
3. Neisser U, et al. (1996) Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. Am Psychol 51:77–101.
4. Rohde TE, Thompson LA (2007) Predicting academic achievement with cognitive ability. Intelligence 35:83–92.
5. te Nijenhuis J, van Vianen AEM, van der Flier H (2007) Score gains on g-loaded tests: Nog. Intelligence 35:283–300.
6. Deary IJ, Strand S, Smith P, Fernandes C (2007) Intelligence and educational achievement. Intelligence 35:13–21.
7. Gottfredson LS (1997) Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence 24:79 –132.
8. Cattell RB (1963) Theory of ?uid and crystallized intelligence: A critical experiment. J Educ Psychol 54:1–22.
9. Baltes PB, Staudinger UM, Lindenberger U (1999) Lifespan psychology: Theory and application to intellectual functioning. Annu Rev Psychol 50:471–507.

>>	Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 13:06:12 No.3942922 File: 93 KB, 887x508, 1319386171935.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 13:34:12 No.3943050

www.nature.com/mp/journal/v16/n10/full/mp201185a.html

>Genome-wide association studies establish that human intelligence is highly heritable and polygenic

>General intelligence is an important human quantitative trait that accounts for much of the variation in diverse cognitive abilities. Individual differences in intelligence are strongly associated with many important life outcomes, including educational and occupational attainments, income, health and lifespan. Data from twin and family studies are consistent with a high heritability of intelligence, but this inference has been controversial. We conducted a genome-wide analysis of 3511 unrelated adults with data on 549 692 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and detailed phenotypes on cognitive traits. We estimate that 40% of the variation in crystallized-type intelligence and 51% of the variation in fluid-type intelligence between individuals is accounted for by linkage disequilibrium between genotyped common SNP markers and unknown causal variants. These estimates provide lower bounds for the narrow-sense heritability of the traits.

>>	Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 14:42:12 No.3943287 File: 839 KB, 1224x1584, 1319394673136.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Racial differences in intelligence are real.

>>	Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 14:46:12 No.3943301 >165 posts and 26 image replies omitted. Click Reply to view.

>>	Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 14:52:12 No.3943318 Does anyone know if depressed people score lower on IQ tests? I've never taken one... I suppose it would be pretty high but I'm fairly foggy a lot of the time. Been depressed pretty much my entire life.

>>	Anonymous Sun, Oct 23, 2011 17:29:12 No.3943862 >>3943318 No idea, buddy.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math