[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 83 KB, 1024x768, why the fuck do women take pictures like this.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5816228 No.5816228 [Reply] [Original]

How much truth is there to the statement, "An IQ test doesn't show how smart you are." ?

>> No.5816235

a lot

there's a difference between smartness and intelligence

>> No.5816239

Depends on how you define "smart".
As a matter of fact, most literature for the real instruments discuss their strengths and weaknesses, as does the peer reviews of the same.

>> No.5816240

iq is more "how easily you learn"

if you don't try to learn you're fucked
it has no correlation with effort.

Source: I have a high IQ but I have no drive and I'm a failure

>> No.5816242

My interpretation has always been that IQ measures the ability/propensity to learn and be intelligent. So all these asshats that spout the fact they have a high IQ doesn't mean anything unless they've applied themselves or learned anything.

>> No.5816244

iq tests measure iq scores, which has a correlation with intelligence

>> No.5816249

Considering everyone has equal intelligence and IQ contradicts that fact, it's pretty safe to assume that IQ tests are obsolete pseudo-science

>> No.5816250

>>5816244
How do you define and measure intelligence? If you can't, on what basis do you think your claim holds any merit?

>> No.5816258

>>5816240
>I have a high IQ but I have no drive and I'm a failure

Me too brother, me too ;_;

>> No.5816264

>>5816249
You are an idiot. This is scientific fact.

>> No.5816265

>>5816240
>>5816258

No offense, but this is what makes you guys aspies and why nobody likes you. You keep reiterating the idea that you're some special little snowflake because you have a high IQ. In reality, no one cares (with the exception of me, because this shit's irritating).

>> No.5816269

>>5816265
>spocial snowflake
>no drive

>> No.5816272

>>5816265
I'm >>5816258 and I hate people like that too, but it is true, I have really bad grades and I'm a failure even though I have a high IQ, which is worthless since I won't ever use it for anything, if it means anything.

>> No.5816280

>>5816269
You're missing my point. Yes, you mentioned you have no drive but this has no impact on your dick measuring contest that is comparing IQs. No one gives a shit that you have a high IQ, let alone you utilizing it or not. It's just turning into a circle jerk.

>> No.5816283

>>5816272
If you really had a high IQ, you would crush every subject that relies on logic. You would have straight As in math, physics, chemistry and you could somehow manage english, history etc. even without learning.

You may have an above average IQ, but you arent as intelligent as you think.

>> No.5816292 [DELETED] 

>>5816240
>>5816258

Agreeing with >>5816265 here. Who cares about your IQ if you can't do anything with it. The only good that telling yourself that you are a special little high IQ snowflake will do is make you feel a bit better about yourself. People like you are annoying as fuck.

Go out and do something with all of that intelligence you claim to have. Or you can just blame your struggles"lack of drive" and become a sheep like the majority of the population.

Your call.

>> No.5816294

>>5816283
>If you really had a high IQ, you would crush every subject that relies on logic.

Baseless assumption.

>You would have straight As in math, physics, chemistry and you could somehow manage english, history etc. even without learning.

This have way more variables than just your fucking IQ, that in case you haven't find out, means nothing.

>You may have an above average IQ, but you arent as intelligent as you think.

I'm not saying I'm intelligent, I'm just saying I have a high IQ.

>> No.5816297

>>5816292
Wow, just wow, you guys are so butthurt about this that you can't even read.

>> No.5816299

>>5816240
>>5816258

Agreeing with >>5816265 here. Who cares about your IQ if you can't do anything with it. The only good that telling yourself that you are a special little high IQ snowflake will do is make you feel a bit better about yourself. People like you are annoying as fuck.

Go out and do something with all of that intelligence you claim to have. Or you can just blame your struggles on "lack of drive" and become a sheep like the majority of the population.

Your call.

>> No.5816302

>IQ thread

So, how are the psychology studies going for you guys?

>> No.5816307

>>5816302
Getting any good reflections? I see the board is a million times slower.

>> No.5816311

>>5816280
Nobody is comparing anything here. Read the thread. People are just giving you information: IQ doesn't mean intelligent because there are people out there with high IQs who have done nothing and have bad grades.

And if we're speaking about dick measuring, you're the one thinking you're the superior one here, and also the namefag.

>> No.5816316

>>5816311
>IQ doesn't mean intelligent because there are people out there with high IQs who have done nothing and have bad grades.
Non sequitur.

>> No.5816319

>>5816311
Never said I was superior; I've never even taken an IQ test. I'm just saying that mentioning you supposedly have a high IQ is irritating. If I'm honest, this guy >>5816299
put it most eloquently.

Besides, I namefag because I started a nuclear (non-Thorium) thread and it lasted awhile, so it stuck. In no way am I trying to make any claims as to my aptitude.

>> No.5816333

>>5816319
Neither do I, but you implied it.
>this is what makes you guys aspies and why nobody likes you

Look, this is like the first time I mention mi IQ on the internet and you guys way overreacted and got really angry, spouting that nobody cared, well, if you don't care don't quote me and don't write a paragraph about how you don't care, I didn't cared either.

And the other guy was all like "nobody cares if you have a high IQ when you haven't acomplish anything with it", all right, I think I already said I haven't acomplish anything, I even said it didn't measure intelligence, but hey, if a guy who claimed to had a high IQ killed your father and raped your mother, feel free to keep overreacting.

>> No.5816339

ITT: Retards who don't realize there are dozens of human intelligences that can be measured, and everyone has pretty much the same amount of intelligence

Anyway, don't mind me and resume yours phrenology-tier discussion

>> No.5816367

>>5816333
Ok, sry, I thought you meant you had high intelligence because of your high IQ.

>> No.5816377

"Smart" means sharp or clever. Like suppose you hit your arm on something and get a "sharp" pain, you may say something like "that smarts!". It doesn't mean the same thing as intelligent in a similar way that knowledgeable isn't the same thing as intelligent. So yes, they're right.

>> No.5816527

>>5816339
Yay! More bullshit equality everyone gets a participation trophy and you're all specialedness.

>> No.5816747

The good IQ tests tell you how good you are at spatial reasoning and recognising visual patterns. It doesn't tell you how "smart" you are, I don't even think being "smart" is actually a physically real thing. Feynman only had an IQ of 120 anyway.

There are other IQ tests on the internet that involve plenty of general trivia and language questions, so those tests can tell you how good you are at sitting on your ass and watching TV.

>>5816339
There are probably different properties of the brain that some people are naturally more gifted at than others. Calling that "intelligence" is just top lel. The "multiple intelligences" idea was just created by some guy with a massive ego who couldn't get over the fact that he scored low on an IQ test

>> No.5816756

>>5816747
haha, my IQ is higher than feynmansI am happy, I viewed myself as untermensch

>> No.5816822

To me, it seems that IQ tests really only measure one's ability to recognize visual patterns, which is certainly important and possibly indicative of other areas of intelligence, but not at all a complete measurement of all aspects of intelligence. For example, it doesn't really measure long-term memory, speed at which one can recall from memory, ability to creatively solve problems or propensity for theoretical understanding. Therefore, I would say that the statement "An IQ test doesn't show you how smart you are" has some truth to it, although IQ tests may be a good starting point.

>> No.5816893

>>5816822

No. IQ tests are terrible at measuring intelligence beyond a very basic level. If you were trying to determine whether an individual is retarded, or incapable of learning to a certain degree, then yes IQ tests serve a purpose.

For anyone that doesn't fit into that category, your personal achievements and academic successes are the only real measure of your 'intelligence'.

But I digress, there are many variables and factors that play a role in one's ability to learn.

I would like to see the effect on amphetamines and other stimulants on IQ tests across a range of people, see if we can artificially induce this 'drive' everyone seems to lack, support the aspie's hypothesis.

>> No.5816897

>>5816893
Oh god no, not amphetamines, they suck and should be banned. They're literally brain ruiners the longer you take them. I'd like to see more research into neuroregeneration.

>> No.5816906

>>5816893
>>5816897

Not prolonged use. I just want to test to remove a variable. If the IQ tests don't change, then you can blame the candidate's lack of success on not putting in the work, as opposed to a lack of 'intelligence'.

Also, I think a lot of this 'lack of drive' and 'ADHD' bullshit going around is mostly due to how we've spent years reinforcing neural pathways that serve little to no purpose beyond thoughtless consumption.

High achievers normally come from families where they're exposed to, and practice, more stimulating activities as opposed to sitting on your ass all day jacking off and laughing at internet videos.

Any takers on a brain-retraining/restructuring test/experiment?

>> No.5817124

Every IQ test holds the flawed assumption that the participant is both ready and motivated to perform to his/her fullest.

>> No.5817141

I've heard IQ tests tests you against how much someone the same age as you would know, and that age based knowledge flat lines around 25 or so until you get to the 60+ years when you start learning more about senior citizen stuff. if your 8 and you have a 200 IQ, you know as much as a 9 year old would. But I've also heard it originally tested against white knowledge, and was designed to make minorities look inferior

>> No.5817162

>>5817124
Was a demotivated child. Scared shitless and did not want to participate in IQ test. Apparently I'm a genius. Granted now I'm failing my final exams due to laziness and a whole lot of mental problems but still, generally showing comprehension and logic, especially in children is almost an involuntary thing for those naturally gifted in doing so.

>> No.5817178

>>5816228

Not much truth, a lot of buttmad though. The tests obviously strives for a correlation between the test result and an ability do learn and discover patterns.
Use your common sense and/or intelligence to figure out to what extend the result correlates with reality.

>> No.5817186

>>5817141
>IQ of 200

IQ has a median of 100 with a standard deviation of 15. Come on anon, you can do this math.

>> No.5817241

A competent IQ test will examine age and various modes of intelligence, not just baseline pattern recognition. There is definitely some meaning to the scores, though I admit it is often grossly exaggerated.

But stepping away from IQ for a second, I hate how /sci/ defines intelligence as success and achievement. What the hell am I reading? From the start, a (potential) cause is not the effect; furthermore, "grades" or other such social accomplishments are incredibly reliable on interpersonal skills and motivation and are even less credible indicators than IQ tests.
Efforts are important, but natural talent is also very much part of the equation -- and I believe true intelligence is that innate ability refined and honed. Contrary to what you think there can be intelligent people who will ultimately never produce anything worth mentioning. It's a testament to how multiple mentalities and circumstances can lead to the same end, and pigeonholing leads to fallacies. Stop trying to invalidate people's strengths over largely irrelevant reasons.

Honestly, the best indicator is probably just to get to know the person.

>> No.5817246

Main problem is that intelligence is not measured only as the ability to think rationally. Universities are filled with people who can make models to calculate the orbit of a planet that is at the other end of the Galaxy yet cannot get a single girlfriend, or people who are extremely competent at biology but have such aggressive and blunt personalities no one likes to be next to them.

Emotional intelligence and ability to cooperate plays a role in overall intelligence. Why? Because they may be independent, but they are related to intelligence as well. Someone who is pissed off consistently and spends most of his time alone is more prone to mistakes and fallacies than someone who takes a breather every hour and can work with his lab mates. Mood, social status, etc. play a fundamental role in limiting or increasing your thought capability.

Furthermore, IQ tests are unrealiable due to synaptic plasticty. If you don't consistently train your parts of the brain involved with the areas you work upon, the brain will let go of such knowledge and skills with time.

Also, epigenetics

>> No.5817254

>>5817246
Is there no connection between rationality and emotional intelligence? I've found that people who are logical in a healthy way are usually the most emotionally sound. It's always the autistic savants and the irrational hormone bombs who seem to me the hardest to get along with.

>> No.5817260

>>5817141
Actually, an IQ of 200 is so exceptionally rare that only a few people in the world have one. They're people like Kim Ung-Yong, who started studying astrophysics at the age of three and a half, or Christopher Langan, who is working on the Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe. These people are much more intelligent than you give them credit for. They're able to think and process and learn in ways that are practically super-human, so I think that an eight-year-old with a 200 IQ would be vastly more knowledgeable than a nine-year-old of average intelligence, or even an eighty-year-old of average intelligence.

>> No.5817264

>>5817260
He doesn't have any idea what he's talking about. A 8-year-old with 200 IQ compared to an average 9-year-old? Absurd.

>> No.5817265

>>5817254
I'd say the same, anon. People who are generally irrational and/or anger easily aren't usually people with a very high intelligence. I would say there are a few major things that could lead to this:
>poor environment growing up (not necessarily monetarily, but emotionally and/or socially as well)
>being raised to be closed-minded
>mental condition such as schizophrenia or depression
>generally not being very intelligent, but still at a certain cutoff to reach full potential in a field

>> No.5817270

>>5817265
I'm of moderately high intelligence but shits been happening and now I act like dan from dan vs. in real life. Online it's a giant masquerade and i don't need to be angry, and when i do i can express it in a much more effective way than real life would allow me to. Don't discount rage, never discount rage.

>> No.5817276

>>5817254

Like I've said, yeah. Emotions, fatigue and/or mental diseases can shut off certain trails of thought entirely and make predjuices much easier to make, which pretty much goes against what rational thought is meant to be. This is very evident in doctors who after long shifts show poorer diagnosis and overall performance in noticing signs and symptoms and interpreting them properly because they're pissed off.

>> No.5817282

>>5817270
Anger is a natural human emotion and can be justified. I think he's talking about angering easily, irrational anger caused by insignificant things. I don't know what your circumstances are, but if there's a sound explanation for your rage then it's fine in my opinion.

>> No.5817284

>>5817282

Main problem isn't having mood changes for a reason once a day for whatever reason. Main problem is when a personality trait does not adapt to the circumstances.

For instance, let's take a guy studying and another guy getting wasted. In a party, the guy stuyding is doing sth wrong. In a library though, the guy getting wasted will get all the weird looks.

>> No.5817287

>>5817282
>angering easily
i anger very very very easily, it sucks. If you bite your tongue as long as possible eventually you chew it off, and when you do you realize how permanent the situation is and that just makes you angrier that it can't change.

>> No.5817305

>>5817276
Well, yeah. It's commonly known that emotions can hamper rational thought. I wasn't aware of that about doctors though, but it's pretty obvious now when I think about it.

I can't say anything comprehensive at the moment, but what I want to say is that I'm sure rationality and emotional intelligence aren't inversely correlated or mutually exclusive. A lot of people seem to think this.

>> No.5817744

IQ defines intelligence.

>> No.5817808

An IQ shows your intellectual capabilities, which are nothing without emotional and conative stability.
So, in a sense, it amounts to a third of your real-life intelligence.
Assuming the test is perfect, and it's not.

>> No.5817812

Psychology is pseudoscience.

>> No.5817813

>>5817808
>real life intelligence
oh how classy, there's two things to have when it comes to intelligence, knowledge and wisdom. knowledge is knowing, wisdom is applying it.

>> No.5817871

>>5816228

There's no difference between the man or women who can quiet themselves and maintain focus on any given subject for extended periods of time and the man who is bored by such activities, but can light up a baseball that varies it's speeds and trajectories at speeds of 70-100mph

It all comes down to ones interest's and what they find exciting.

An IQ test is ultimately just a measure of focus. Someone who scores bad can easily adjust that score by focusing and forcing interest to improve their problem solving skills.

>> No.5817886

>>5816272

This is proof that having a high IQ doesn't really mean anything other than you can answer questions efficiently.

Creation and vision will always be the pinnacle reward for being a responsible state of consciousness.

The human beliefs and definitions need to be corrected before reaching that pinnacle state of consciousness where you are granted constant vision for creation.

The only way to correct the beliefs and definitions of ones consciousness though is to listen to the emotions. Emotions tell you where you are at in terms of feeling, they are not the end all be all.

>> No.5817924
File: 966 KB, 1920x1440, 1367561711699.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5817924

>>5817254

Yeah it's all about perspective in relation to the emotions. People who can separate themselves from their emotional responses before succumbing to them are always in a position to become more well off.

Psychology is just like Warfare. The man with the highest point of view (satellite perspective) is the man with the best chances to make the more optimal decisions in relation to his over all interests as he will have a broader perspective of all possible outcomes.

When you are able to see your emotions from an outside perspective, from a distance, you can utilize a beneficial logical response.

I know spirituality doesn't belong on this board, but I'm fascinated by the fact the new age spirituality stresses the fact that the emotions are no more than a guidance system that tells you how efficient and optimal you are as a consciousness.

It's because of this that my personal "intelligence" has increased, simply because my emotional awareness has expanded in relation to any negative felt emotion, which is the root cause of all resistance within man.

>> No.5817929

>>5817924
Emotions are for aligning your conscious perspective to achieve optimum happiness, then you'll be at peak performance.

>> No.5817947

>>5817929

I agree

It's fucking scary cool when you actually gain control over yourself in ways you never thought you could.

Your ceiling increases as does the over all value and perspective in life.

>> No.5817949

>>5816249
>Considering everyone has equal intelligence
What fucking planet do you live on?

>> No.5817952

>>5817947
This is why meditation was such a strong focus for the disciplined minds of the monks. Control is thoughts that wear themselves out.

>> No.5817953

>>5816283
>You would have straight As in math, physics, chemistry

Grades do not correlate to how well you've learned something. I've gotten A's in classes that I learned nothing from, and I feel I've learned the most from classes I got B's and C's in.

It all depends on the teacher, really.

>> No.5817970

>>5817141
>tested against white knowledge, and was designed to make minorities look inferior

Yet somehow asians and jews scored higher than white countries.

You'd think if they were going through the trouble to make it biased towards minorities, they'd make it biased towards all minorities.

>> No.5817980

>>5817952

>that moment you realize you don't have to be upset about anything ever again, that you have a choice

consciousness really is an amazing thing when you dive into it

>> No.5817983

>>5817980
And if you live or suffer long enough, you can see how it's like a phoenix that retains everything it learns.

>> No.5817992

>>5816244
i'd agree with that since i usually score around 155 and i don't feel nearly that smart

>> No.5817995

>>5817983
Add that to the fact you will actually laugh at any suffering you experienced as it was truly no more than a 'knee scrape' in the grand scheme of the peace and higher perspective that is literally right next to you, waiting to be adopted.

There really is no meaning to life, it's all completely neutral. You have the ability to give it whatever meaning you want.

Now you know there's going to come a time when this final conclusion of just how powerful human consciousness is, will be fully realized and this knowledge will be implemented into society. That will be a wild time.

I know it seems like we're getting off topic, but this shit couldn't be more relevant.

>> No.5818002

>>5817995
And every one of it's citizens will know peace and content. What a glorious world on the tip of the common philosophers tongue, and in the eyes of those who wish to uphold it and prosper.

>> No.5818024
File: 7 KB, 251x201, brofist.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5818024

>>5818002

Well said

>> No.5818028

>>5818024
thanks, and soon.

>> No.5818031

http://listverse.com/2013/05/19/8-reasons-the-iq-is-meaningless/

>> No.5818073

>>5816228
Depending upon your definition of the word 'smart', I'd say that there is truth to that statement.
Many IQ are heavily weighted by areas such as vocabulary, knowledge and similarities (essentially vocab part 2) which can all be influenced greatly by socioeconomic factors.
People of lower socioeconomic backgrounds are more likely to have learned slang words or have knowledge in areas that the IQ test doesn't cover.
In other words, if your definition of smart is a well-working, efficient brain that can follow procedure or grasp higher-order concepts, than I'd say yes.
But if you're definition of smart is a cultured snob who reads the dictionary every night, I'd say no.

>> No.5818099

>>5817260
Use a calculator, an IQ of 200 is over 6 SD away from the mean. Given there are 7 billion people on earth, only 0.092 can have an IQ of 200 or greater.

It's IMPOSSIBLE.

>> No.5818110

Sure there are other real-world manifestations of intelligence beyond IQ (mathematical / logical).
-other intelligence
-focus
-memory
-rate at which new concepts are absorbed
-reaction time
-creativity

I think one of the problems with IQ is that it isn't a direct measure of structural fitness or adaptability in terms of the actual physiology of our brains.

Right now all we can do is establish a metric for some proxy measure of a brain's organizational capacity by testing its real world manifestation. But because so many variables are involved, the accuracy of this metric can and does change significantly over time and between populations that share similar conditions affecting intelligence.