IQ General

File: 57 KB, 409x367, 1381678542001.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

IQ General Anonymous Tue Oct 22 22:50:46 2013 No.6108771 [Reply] [Original]

>tfw top 1% IQ
>tfw there are still 70 million people smarter than you

H-hold me, /sci/...

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 22 22:51:15 2013 No.6108776 hard work > IQ ez

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 22 22:51:45 2013 No.6108775 >>6108771 >IQ = Smart No wonder you're retarded. Also reported for fagging up this board.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 22 22:52:45 2013 No.6108777 If youre so smart why are you so stupid?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 01:04:58 2013 No.6108994 Doesn't IQ relate how well you are able to comprehend something or how well you can pick it up and understand it?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 01:14:29 2013 No.6109009 >>6108994 IQ measures many skills depending on the kind of test being used but extreme high IQ people often have average lives. Being successful involves many other skills besides having a good IQ.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 01:19:27 2013 No.6109015 >>6108775 no announcing reports u fgt

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 01:27:27 2013 No.6109026 If I had an IQ of 150, I would be as smart as six idiots.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 08:11:54 2013 No.6109391 >tfw 99.999.... percentile so close to 100%

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 08:13:53 2013 No.6109392 >>6108994 IQ relates to your success in life and your abilities to achieve anything important.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 08:14:23 2013 No.6109394 >>6108771 and nearly 7 billion who are less of a faggot than you

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 08:27:53 2013 No.6109412 If you are so intelligent why are you so stupid?

Anonymous Wed Oct 23 08:30:53 2013 No.6109419
File: 9 KB, 267x181, 130783643800120110725-22047-1euk606.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>I will never be a genius
>I will never understand everything without having to put a minimal amount of effort into it
>even if I study hard I will just be average and not smart enough to invent something new

Why did I have to be born?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 08:33:53 2013 No.6109422 >>6109419 Don't worry, not everyone has to be a genius. Even if your IQ is under 125, the world needs its janitors and fast wood workers.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 08:35:54 2013 No.6109424 >>6109422 Fuck that. I rather die than live a meaningless life of a sheep.

Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:02:37 2013 No.6109460

>>6109424
in the greater scheme of things everyone's life is pretty meaningless no matter how high a human's IQ.
janitor makes contributions that influence our world in some positive way, so do scientists. One may be more influential but on the whole all are pretty small beans.

Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:14:06 2013 No.6109475

>>6109460
Sure but I want to create something. Have a real goal in life. Have something I am passionate about. But it should be something scientific. My dream would be to make big progressions towards ai and robotics. But I am fucking dumb and have trouble understanding high school math and entry level programming. If I tried harder maybe I could get better but I would still lack the intelligence and creativity to develop something new.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:19:07 2013 No.6109478 File: 18 KB, 374x532, 1379358015343.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6109475 This is what I heard. >i had a shitty high school experience >therefore I am an idiot who can't learn shit >pity me /sci/ ;_; Read a book, nigger.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:23:07 2013 No.6109480 Can we have all IQ threads deleted with bans from now on? Holy shit you delusional fucks are pretentious.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:24:36 2013 No.6109482 File: 66 KB, 300x300, 1352080652775.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6109422 >fast wood workers I got'cha covered.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:25:07 2013 No.6109483 >>6109480 >pretentious It's not so much pretentious as cripplingly insecure.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:26:06 2013 No.6109485 >>6109478 >Read a book This. Reading is one of the simplest ways you can sharpen your mind. Start with things you enjoy, then move on to things that are useful or interesting - but perhaps more tedious reads.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:27:37 2013 No.6109486 >>6109478 >>6109485 I tried reading books but I can barely remember anything after I read them. And if it's a scientific book I have trouble understanding it at all.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:27:37 2013 No.6109487 I never got an accurate read out on my IQ, anyone have a good reliable site for that (free preferably)? Or is it one of those things you have to go to a facility to get tested on?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:29:37 2013 No.6109490 >>6109486 You have to try to understand the part of the book you're on before you continue. Don't be too shocked.

Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:32:06 2013 No.6109495

>>6109486
If memory is your problem, try keeping a journal. That's what I credit my good memory with. I also keep a dream journal. I've also read a book on memory and you'd be suprized how much just learning some basic theories on how memory works will help you develop your own systems.
Like with anything in life, you must exercise/train to get better at it...and if you don't your talent will fade.

Reading will increase your memory over time also, because every time you put the book down for a time, and then pick it back up again, you'll have to remember all the stuff that happened before you stopped reading. Keep at it. And stick to fictional, entertainment type stories until you're ready for more tedious/advanced reading.

smarter than you !!6EmLjTOTG91 Wed Oct 23 09:39:06 2013 No.6109501
File: 116 KB, 1000x749, FEELS GOOD MAN DOG TEXT.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Going by the percentiles I know there are less than a million people smarter than me. Many of them live in 3rd world countries and will never have access to education. That means after combining my superior cognitive abilities with my polymath knowledge I am top elite tier.

Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:39:06 2013 No.6109502

>>6109424
>meaningless

Fuck you, I love janitors. They do the shit I don't want to do while I do the shit they don't want to. It's an honest, necessary profession and the people doing the work tend to be good. Granted you're going to have a hard time jacking off over a space elevator thread with them but they deserve respect.

Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:49:06 2013 No.6109516

>>6109501
I work in IT. I'm certainly not the smartest person in the world, probably not even in the top 10% - though I haven't bothered ranking my IQ in a serious way yet.

Some of the stupidest people I meet are the ones who believe they are very smart. IQ is important to be sure, but certainly isn't the end-all-be-all of intelligence, and should never be treated as such.

It's important to acknowledge that there certainly are different kinds of intelligence, and excelling in one over others doesn't necessarily make a person smart.

I'm sure you're well aware of all this though.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:50:07 2013 No.6109517 >>6109495 But how did you remember what the memory book said?

>>	smarter than you !!6EmLjTOTG91 Wed Oct 23 09:52:06 2013 No.6109519 >>6109516 >and excelling in one over others doesn't necessarily make a person smart. But excelling in all of them does.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:55:36 2013 No.6109521 >>6108771 Seeing as you don't understand what IQ represents, I can assure you there are at least a billion people 'smarter' than you.

Anonymous Wed Oct 23 09:57:36 2013 No.6109525

>>6109517

Ok there can be two things going on here:

>1 - You have terrible memory.
If that's true, that sucks bro

>2 - You have normal memory but think it's terrible because you don't get that "normal memory" is actually sort of bad.
If that's the case, the way to retain knowledge is to USE knowledge. If you are using a textbook, it probably has problems in the back. Solve those - don't be afraid to look shit up WHILE solving, but solve those. This checks A) whether you understood the things you learned and B) helps you retain the material you read.

Anonymous Wed Oct 23 10:02:37 2013 No.6109528

>>6109517
It's a strange sensation thinking about the internal processes of your body, most especially with processes in the brain. The simple act of THINKING about memory, will improve your memory.

Essentially all memory boils down to is creating lasting impressions on the brain. There are many many different systems for achieving this, but the idea at its core is relatively simple. You should try to focus on your particular learning niche. So if you learn well by visualizing then try picturing the thing you want to remember in your mind, take a bit of time to "make an impression" on your mind, and then cross reference it with something so you can access it when you need it. THIS TAKES PRACTICE - you wont read my words and instantly be better at remembering shit.

I find touch is a powerful anchor for memory. Especially if you want someone else to remember something - touch them lightly on the arm or shoulder. You can also do this to yourself and use that as an anchor to the memory you want to retrieve - some people used to do thing thing where they'd tie a string around their finger - this is why that trick works.

>>6109519
As unlikely as it is that someone could excel in all areas of intelligence (some areas are contradictory to one another, common sense and "street smarts" tend to not rub well with other kinds of intelligence, not to mention intelligence one might not even be aware or acknowledge exists), someone who holds this belief in their mind that they are smart or smarter than other people puts themselves in a dangerous position to close themselves off to learning new things, or even be taken advantage of by supposedly stupid people. It's important for smart people to recognize that they don't really know as much as they think they do, and being open minded to that belief is the smartest thing anyone can do for themselves.

That being said, I'm really not trying to start shit with you, just expressing my views on the nature of intelligence.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 10:05:36 2013 No.6109532 File: 524 KB, 637x472, 1349007876182.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6108771 Too bad you're never gonne do anything with that IQ OP

Anonymous Wed Oct 23 10:08:37 2013 No.6109535

>>6108771

IQ is problem solving potential, you goddamn tool. If I wanted to teach someone math relatively quickly, I'd probably call you. If I want to cut down a tree, hunt wild game, make a chair out of wood, comfort a grieving friend, write a novel, climb a mountain or any of a thousand other things you very likely (by your not understanding IQ) don't know how to do, you will be at the bottom of my list, below AT LEAST a couple billion people smarter than you.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 10:13:06 2013 No.6109539 >>6109460 >>6109478 >>6109485 >>6109495 >>6109502 >>6109525 >>6109528 c'mon /sci/, why did you give actual advice & motivation? i came here to see teh lulz

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 10:30:37 2013 No.6109562 >>6109539 There's a cool board you can visit where they do nothing but make "lulz". >>>/s4s/ Why, I think I'll head there now and prep it for you! :^)

>>	smarter than you !!6EmLjTOTG91 Wed Oct 23 10:39:57 2013 No.6109570 >>6109539 Don't listen to this faggot >>6109562. No lulz are to be found there, only retardation. If you're looking for lulz, go to >>>/b/

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 10:56:28 2013 No.6109582 >>6109392 this

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 12:17:47 2013 No.6109712 >>6109539 Because I'm /new/ here.

Anonymous Wed Oct 23 15:49:40 2013 No.6110160

>>6109516
>Some of the stupidest people I meet are the ones who believe they are very smart. IQ is important to be sure, but certainly isn't the end-all-be-all of intelligence, and should never be treated as such.

This is called the Dunning Kruger effect. The reason is that the ability to have correct self-assessments is the same ability that makes you good at whatever. Thus, people with low ability will also have more incorrect self-assessments, often inflated (because they are low in ability, think that they are in the 50th centile is a large inflation).

Cf.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Review paper:
Ehrlinger, Joyce; Johnson, Kerri; Banner, Matthew; Dunning, David; Kruger, Justin (2008). "Why the unskilled are unaware: Further explorations of (absent) self-insight among the incompetent". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (PDF) 105 (105): 98–121.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 15:55:22 2013 No.6110175 >>6109391 huehuehuehue

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 15:59:52 2013 No.6110182 >>6110160 >Dunning Kruger effect Yes this is what I was referring to, but I didn't remember the name of it. This effect covers cases where intelligent people are overly critical in their self-assessments, correct?

Anonymous Wed Oct 23 16:11:15 2013 No.6110206

>>6110160
You know, the actual data they collected showed that not only do low-functioning people typically believe they're about average, but also that high-functioning people also typically believe they're about average, and often rate their abilities below average.

What they actually found was that people at all levels are terrible at self-assessment of their capabilities, yet everybody references the Dunning-Kruger effect as "dumb people being too dumb to know they're dumb".

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 16:18:44 2013 No.6110218 I remember I ran the numbers on my IQ and there are 7 million people in the world that are smarter than me. Not many, but way too many.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 16:45:45 2013 No.6110290 >>6108777 I was raised by TV and video games, I'm a victim of society! Also, I'm not nearly as dumb as I used to be.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 16:49:13 2013 No.6110299 >>6109482 Fast food workers worked on Project Mayhem...

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 23 16:58:44 2013 No.6110313 File: 28 KB, 339x382, christopher-langan.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >tfw you'll never be as smart as this guy

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 15:26:46 2013 No.6112100 >>6110313 >Creates a failed concept >Creates another failed High IQ society concept >Does menial jobs despite wanting to change the world >Fades into insignificance Wow So impress So genius Wow

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 15:29:54 2013 No.6112103 >>6109485 can't you just read the internet instead?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 15:30:04 2013 No.6112105 >>6109532 More than once a millisecond? Bullshit, sir; bullshit.

Anonymous Thu Oct 24 15:59:35 2013 No.6112149

>>6112103
>can't you just read the internet instead
Possibly. But generally you get information in bite sized bits on the internet, rather than long drawn out text. Also, I have a harder time staying focused on a pdf on my screen than I do a book in my hand...

Reading in general is good. But I haven't quite given up on the value of actual books.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 16:06:05 2013 No.6112167 File: 144 KB, 458x357, 1368293432676[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6109482 >pic related

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 18:45:34 2013 No.6112466 >>6110218 I did the same. There were 5 people on earth smarter (IQ speaking) than me. I already killed 2, working on the 3 others. Soon...

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 19:02:05 2013 No.6112492 >>6110218 >"ran the numbers" >division by a power of ten Wow, you really are smart! That online test didn't lie!

Anonymous Thu Oct 24 19:38:14 2013 No.6112547

>>6108776
This.
There are many things that are more important than pure intelligence.

>Oh no, math. Oh no, a book. Help.
>If I don't understand everything at the first glance, I'll never understand it.
Sometimes it feels like people are trying to avoid thinking at any cost.
Especially if I have to read through the same page a thousand times until I barely understand it, just to have some douchebag coming over to tell me that I'm lucky to be smart. No I'm not, you fucking retard.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 19:41:43 2013 No.6112551 >>6109412 /sci/ in one post

Anonymous Thu Oct 24 19:56:14 2013 No.6112569

>>6108771

>not realizing IQ is a measure of variance in intelligence and not an absolute measure of intelligence.

Einstein might be a few deviations away from Homer Simpson, but in terms of absolute intelligence, it may actually mean virtually no difference in absolute intelligence whatsoever.

Anonymous Thu Oct 24 20:00:45 2013 No.6112582

>>6112569

God what the fuck? Sorry I'm high right now. That sentence should read:

Einstein may be a few standard deviations away from Homer Simpson in terms of IQ, but this may translate to a virtually insignificant difference in absolute intelligence.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 20:01:45 2013 No.6112583 its not healthy to be so obsessed with who's smarter... also seems counter-productive and competitive in a grade-school way

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 20:13:14 2013 No.6112613 File: 50 KB, 576x416, 1362875177646.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >muh ego >waah why am I not part of the elite Stupids, all of you.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 20:35:43 2013 No.6112651 there are different kinds of smarts: book smarts and common sense/real smarts guess which is more useful?

>>	poland Thu Oct 24 20:44:44 2013 No.6112669 >tfw 8% off joining the IQ club fuggg

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 20:47:44 2013 No.6112675 >>6109535 >problem solving potential Why dont you guys with super high IQ solve the problem of your low self steem?

Anonymous Thu Oct 24 20:49:43 2013 No.6112677
File: 28 KB, 250x250, newman.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>caring about IQ
>not caring about achievements

See? You're already one dumb motherfucker to put some numbers over actual progress. Stephen Hawking would slap your shit around (if he could) if he ever hears you talk about yourself in that tone.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 21:51:44 2013 No.6112815 >>6112651 what about street smarts?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 22:00:44 2013 No.6112836 >>6108771 >internet credentials

Anonymous Thu Oct 24 22:08:44 2013 No.6112847
File: 138 KB, 500x321, 14728.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6112815
>be surrounded by street thugs
>as you're about to think your favorite carl sagan quote to ba-dazzle the thugs, they're already shanking and kicking your skinny body
>howl help with your nasally voice, but nobody will hear you in this neighborhood nigga

Books couldn't save little Eugene from the... STREET SMARTS

Anonymous Thu Oct 24 22:13:14 2013 No.6112854 [DELETED]

>>6109501
The first man has a higher IQ than you. He believes in god and has never done anything important ever, despite a university education and access to all the information and opportunity afforded to those born in the first world. The second man has a lower IQ than me, and was born to a working class father that wasn't able to understand Calculus.

Who do you really think is the smartest out of the four of us?

>>6112105
721 min^-1
721/60 sec^-1
721/60000 millisecond^1
Go back to school.

Anonymous Thu Oct 24 22:14:43 2013 No.6112856
File: 66 KB, 614x379, ISHYGDDT.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6109501
The first man has a higher IQ than you. He believes in god and has never done anything important ever, despite a university education and access to all the information and opportunity afforded to those born in the first world. The second man has a lower IQ than me, and was born to a working class father that wasn't able to understand Calculus.

Who do you really think is the smartest out of the four of us?

>>6112105
721 min^-1
721/60 sec^-1
721/60000 millisecond^1
Go back to school.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 22:18:14 2013 No.6112865 I don't know where people got the idea that people with high IQ don't work hard at things. They just naturally put a lot of effort into their work so it seems like nothing to them. Don't be confused by that aspect.

Anonymous Thu Oct 24 22:24:14 2013 No.6112876

Do arguments have to erupt when anyone mentions IQ?? Do we have to throw around ad hominems of pretentiousness and insecurity? Does some idiot all ways have to ensure that everyone is aware that hard work matters, and that a high IQ is not an automatic ticket to owning your own microsoft? The researchers in the field believe IQ is real, that most of the variance in IQ score is genetic, and that ones conscientiousness score is also a good predictor of success. That's good data, and good science, whether you agree or disagree; in future, just state why you agree or disagree, and move the fuck on. This is /sci/, not /b/.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 22:26:44 2013 No.6112881 how to maximize learning?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 22:27:44 2013 No.6112884 >>6112876 > Do arguments have to erupt when anyone mentions IQ?? From previous observations of /sci/, I would go with yes, every time. I like this guy though.>>6112856 Might copypasta him

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 22:40:43 2013 No.6112905 >>6112884 I like you too. I think you got a purty mouth.

Anonymous Thu Oct 24 22:50:44 2013 No.6112919

>>6112884
>From previous observations of /sci/, I would go with yes, every time.

I think it's ridiculous. I scored 136 on an IQ test; its not genius, but it's fairly high. Can't I own that without some dickhead on this board saying "IQ is meaningless" or "hard work is more important". But fuck it, I took the test under controlled conditions due to academic problems in my high school years, and thats what I got. I can't help what I scored. How on earth could I be pretentious or insecure about a number I scored on a test? I'm also lazy as shit and I own that also, I dropped out of my PhD literally months before my thesis was due. I should be able to admit I got a high IQ score without offending what seems to be the overwhelming majority of /sci/.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 24 22:58:44 2013 No.6112931 Related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dkv0KCR3Yiw

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 25 00:19:30 2013 No.6113056 Who was it that said "B students end up working for C students while A students end up watching the kids?"

Anonymous Fri Oct 25 00:31:01 2013 No.6113076

>>6112856
I think Richard Feynman is a great example of the limits of scoring "intelligence" in terms of Iq. Feynman colleagues, I think, said that he had an intuitive understanding of his equations and their true implications that was never before matched. Iq tests happen don't test that

One of my friends is the kindest, most patient, nicest people I've met. I don't know what he would score on an iq test, he doesn't do amazingly well at school, but he's still a great guy to be around

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 25 01:14:31 2013 No.6113133 >>6109532 you mean except being a fag

Anonymous Fri Oct 25 09:24:08 2013 No.6113474

>>6112847
I believe Street Smarts has to do with an intuitive skepticism that people pick up as a way to protect themselves, not just from Thugs, but from con artists, thieves, and others that would do the person harm. Understanding these concepts, often lead to a person who is street smart becoming one of those things, because they have a better understanding of how it works, and why it works. Obviously, not all criminals are created equal.

A highly intelligent individual might fall prey to a clever con artist, or might make the mistake of not avoiding those "Thugs", either because he doesn't recognize them for what they are or because he holds dangerous egalitarian beliefs.

A street wise or street smart person, is able to see these things for what they are.

Can someone be intellegent and street smart? Absolutely. Check out the Yellow Kid (Joseph Weil).

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 25 09:26:07 2013 No.6113478 >>6113474 Just to add a bit more, it may be the case that street smarts is a combination of different kinds of intelligence, such as emotional and social intelligence, along with a healthy dose of skepticism and or pessimism.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 25 09:51:36 2013 No.6113502 IQ threads need to be deleted on sight.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 25 10:11:44 2013 No.6113530 me have high IQ me socially dominant ooga booga

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 25 11:22:33 2013 No.6113586 >>6113530 bix nood mugafuga

Anonymous Sat Oct 26 07:28:55 2013 No.6115206

>>6113076
>Iq tests happen don't test that

In fact they do. They test a wide range of mathematically relevant abilities. But they also happen to test much more, e.g. verbal intelligence. Feynman might have been an autist talented for physics but in general he was unintelligent. Outside of physics his skills were sub-par, as evidenced by his inability to understand social sciences.

Anonymous Sat Oct 26 07:42:26 2013 No.6115218

>>6109475
>big progressions
that's where your problem is, you can contribute in many ways. you can contribute without ever attaining glory or fame. Become a teacher, encourage students to work with robotics outside of school by forming clubs/societies, that is still major contribution

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 26 08:11:55 2013 No.6115242 IQ faggots are the cancer killing /sci/

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 26 11:30:01 2013 No.6115444 >>6109422 >tfw 124 IQ

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 26 14:42:22 2013 No.6115722 but guys. how do you find out your IQ properly

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 26 15:02:52 2013 No.6115769 >>6115722 Take loads of online IQ tests, ignore all scores except the highest, now you know you are a /sci/ genius

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 26 23:45:32 2013 No.6116984 File: 77 KB, 768x1280, 1382729816650.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6108771 >internet test >not knowing you'd actually need a supervised test that can take up to several sessions and is advised by a psychologist

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 26 23:52:32 2013 No.6116995 >>6115769 Hooray, I got 190. I'm a genius. Can anyone tell me what a logarithm is? Lol.

Anonymous Sat Oct 26 23:55:15 2013 No.6116998
File: 70 KB, 285x233, blocklandsuicidebooth.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6116984
>iq test
>not knowing that intelligence is a subjective quality and IQ is nothing more than an attempt at quantifying intelligence that also happens to be useful for diagnosing mental illnesses

you faggots might as well be bragging about your luminosity BPI scores. This is coming from someone who has scored 140 on a professionally administered IQ test.

An IQ score is not an achievement. Get the fuck over it and start doing something worthwhile with your lives. Preferably pic related

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 26 23:56:45 2013 No.6117003 >>6116998 >professionally administered IQ test. where and what for?

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:00:44 2013 No.6117009

>>6117003
as in administered to me by a psychologist I went to for my ADD. I had to take an IQ test for a merit program I entered in high school.

the message from my post isn't 'go get a professionally administered IQ test', it's 'go get real accomplishments'.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:04:22 2013 No.6117016 >>6117009 the message of my comment was 'i doubt i am talking to someone who is at the top 0.4% of the population at barely the age of 22'

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:07:51 2013 No.6117023

>>6117016
shows what you know about IQ tests.

Most people's IQ scores do not change by more than 5 or so points throughout their whole lifetime. The idea is that it's supposed to be a measurement of so-called 'innate intelligence' that isn't just knowledge gained from school and work experience.

Therefore, if I was given a test at age 8, I would have still scored very close to 140.

any more questions?

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:07:51 2013 No.6117024 >>6117016 IQ is supposed to be age independent. But nice try.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:09:52 2013 No.6117031 does a high score in online iq tests confirm that i am good at taking online iq tests?

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:11:22 2013 No.6117036

>>6117024
>>6117023
yeah but, at the end, how accurate is this all?
it feels like that at its bottom, its a test devised to weed out the really impaired ones and those who take an interest in what they do (as long as what they do concerns certain partitions of logic) from the general public in educational matters.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:12:21 2013 No.6117038 >>6117024 pfffttttt fffttttttt good one

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:13:21 2013 No.6117041 >>6117023 >>6117024 Quit emphasizing your stupidity. Do you not realize how stupid you sound right now. By your logic a newborn could have a 150 average. Yet a newborns brain is underdeveloped and it cannot take care of itself.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:15:52 2013 No.6117046 i hate it when parents make youtube videos of their babies with the title "is this normal?"

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:15:52 2013 No.6117047

>>6117036
>its a test devised to weed out the really impaired ones and those who take an interest in what they do (as long as what they do concerns certain partitions of logic) from the general public in educational matters.

Serious question, have you ever taken a real IQ test? It's basically spatial reasoning and pattern problems. There's very little math or vocabulary or writing or anything classified as 'academic'. You can be very 'educated' in terms of how much you know about US history, science, mathematics, etc, and still score low on an IQ test. The only 'academic' question I remember having been asked when I took the test was, "What is the capital of modern-day Greece?"

I do not know what you're asking about 'interest in certain partitions of logic'.

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:17:21 2013 No.6117054

>>6117041
>Quit emphasizing your stupidity. Do you not realize how stupid you sound right now.

I'd say you sound pretty insecure right now. Who are you trying to reassure here, exactly?

>By your logic a newborn could have a 150 average. Yet a newborns brain is underdeveloped and it cannot take care of itself.

IQ tests are administered to kids as young as 4. It's age-independent up until age 4 because, yeah, newborns have physiologically underdeveloped brains. Does that clear it up for you?

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:18:52 2013 No.6117055 >>6117047 >"What is the capital of modern-day Greece?" seriously that was on the test I mean i knew IQ tests where kinda shit but that just takes the cake of subjective stupidity

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:20:21 2013 No.6117064

>>6117047
>Serious question, have you ever taken a real IQ test? It's basically spatial reasoning and pattern problems. There's very little math or vocabulary or writing or anything classified as 'academic'. You can be very 'educated' in terms of how much you know about US history, science, mathematics, etc, and still score low on an IQ test. The only 'academic' question I remember having been asked when I took the test was, "What is the capital of modern-day Greece?"
interest in terms of being a somewhat self-exploring learner instead of a passive learner.

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:20:51 2013 No.6117060

>>6117055
I remember keeping track of culture-specific questions like that, and that was the only one.

I actually asked the guy administering it to me if it was a joke, since it was completely non-sequitor after I had been asked a bunch of pattern and spatial problems.

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:22:52 2013 No.6117067

>>6117064
>interest in terms of being a somewhat self-exploring learner instead of a passive learner.

You're using educator jargen now. Let me reiterate: There are very few questions on the IQ test that are taught through school or textbooks or any other source of information. It's basically a test of how well you can complete puzzles.

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:24:21 2013 No.6117072

>>6117054
Not overly insecure, more or less just trying to rustle your jimmies. Also IQ is not something to overly brag about. For not only is it inaccurate in measuring intelligence. But, it gives people a false belief of their intelligence.

Also, your fedora is showing. Lol

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:26:22 2013 No.6117076

>>6117067
>a test of how well you can complete puzzles.
and you solve puzzles by taking utmost interest in getting a grip on matters independently is what i was suggesting. and i didnt mean to use inherently educational syntax but if it is, hell, why not.

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:29:05 2013 No.6117081
File: 260 KB, 450x1000, jokes on them I was only pretending.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6117072
>Not overly insecure, more or less just trying to rustle your jimmies
<pic related>

>Also IQ is not something to overly brag about. For not only is it inaccurate in measuring intelligence. But, it gives people a false belief of their intelligence.

Pretty much yeah, but I don't really think there's such a thing as innate intelligence, and further I don't think it matters. If you do great things, you're intelligent in my book. If you don't, you're useless. high IQ or not.

>Also, your fedora is showing. Lol
lol

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:31:05 2013 No.6117085

>>6117076
>and you solve puzzles by taking utmost interest in getting a grip on matters independently is what i was suggesting.

You're feeding me platitudes with no specific argument. Are you suggesting that people who read more books perform puzzles better? Or that people who put more hours into studying at school perform puzzles better? Give me something testable please.

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:47:32 2013 No.6117115
File: 43 KB, 348x348, 1380466830613.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6117085
>Are you suggesting that people who read more books perform puzzles better?
no im exactly not. people who regularly take an interest in 'puzzles' (well not just literary jigsaws but you know what i mean) and find them a worthwhile challenge perform better at puzzles. And in iq testing, puzzle-solving is the merit applied to determine if testees are scientifically gifted. which is why we see so many people with high iqs not excelling in the final fields, because, while having picked up on many things testable and not, sitting in a library for three hours was a skill they never picked up on.

>Give me something testable please.
pic related you just went full pleb political atheist fedora-tier.
as if you were to sit just down the same instant and do a control study of what i just claimed.

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 00:54:02 2013 No.6117131

>>6117115
>And in iq testing, puzzle-solving is the merit applied to determine if testees are scientifically gifted.

Except that's not what an IQ test advertises to measure. It's supposed to be a measurement of innate/general intelligence.

>which is why we see so many people with high iqs not excelling in the final fields, because, while having picked up on many things testable and not, sitting in a library for three hours was a skill they never picked up on.

Where do you see this? I hate to be that guy, but cite your sources.

>pic related you just went full pleb political atheist fedora-tier.
as if you were to sit just down the same instant and do a control study of what i just claimed.

It's not even like I intend to design an experiment to test it. I just want you to rephrase what you're arguing in a way that isn't completely ambiguous and confusing.

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 01:19:02 2013 No.6117160

>>6117131

>Where do you see this? I hate to be that guy, but cite your sources.
>a way that isn't completely ambiguous and confusing.

arent we kind of crippling ourselves when we demand each other to cite massive studies for everything we say?
Especially since studies can still be flawed or biased, considering that the conducting authority and the system of perception that the authority derives suggestions from is still a most ambiguous link to the chain after all.

like, what im saying, is that even you or a dozen people like you are too much for this test to hold any ground because this test is supposed to be measuring every cognitive ability under the sun (which it obviously does not). Now suppose i get a 'study' by xy suggesting this is true, which is an undertaking of its own but still, and another instance pulls out a study suggesting otherwise - then you are in practice free to choose which body of evidence you want to take a position from, since each study is effective enough in sustaining an opinion or for example a creating an entire public opinion.
This is a scientific dogma if you will isnt it !?

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 01:22:34 2013 No.6117164 >>6117160 *for example creating

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 01:25:03 2013 No.6117165 File: 137 KB, 1311x653, thatwasreallyhard.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6108771 I know that feel bro. Only thing I've got going for me is that I'm not an aspie, and am actually a (mostly) normal and functioning human being.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 01:28:33 2013 No.6117172 >>6117165 how are your grades if you dont mind me ask

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 01:29:33 2013 No.6117174

>>6117160
>Now suppose i get a 'study' by xy suggesting this is true, which is an undertaking of its own but still, and another instance pulls out a study suggesting otherwise - then you are in practice free to choose which body of evidence you want to take a position from, since each study is effective enough in sustaining an opinion or for example a creating an entire public opinion.

Yeah, I'll admit that it's wrong for me to ask for sources just to cherrypick studies to support my own personal views. However, the main reason I wanted him to rephrase what he was saying in a testable form was because I had literally no idea what he was saying. I get the feeling that he isn't a very good writer.

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 01:33:32 2013 No.6117180

>>6117172
They were pretty good, but not incredible.
I got one third of the way between A and A+ average in an honours degree in electrical engineering. I didn't really bother doing too much study though, I just aimed for the knee point of the effort / returns scale. If all I wanted was grades I could have been pretty close to straight A+'s.

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 01:40:02 2013 No.6117187
File: 79 KB, 1105x614, 1375901379004.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6117174
>I get the feeling that he isn't a very good writer.
im a quick but messy typist and yeah i suck at phrasing things in a culminated manner.

but yeah i think we have gotten caught up with this test a bit too much because honestly, it doesnt seem to even remotely be an accurate determinant for what a good scientist is. i think its better to let it be a little hammer belonging to the psychologists toolbox rather than the measurement for 'uwh im a better genetic composure than you you suck and im on my way to the olymp'.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 01:44:02 2013 No.6117196 File: 52 KB, 431x415, 1379244461403.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6117180 fucking jelly

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 03:10:34 2013 No.6117298 ITT: fags that think IQ matters right now i am in columbia witha 1500 SAT score they accepted me because of my other shit which involved hard work stay pleb /sci/

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 06:16:03 2013 No.6117526 sokay to 0.00000001% here

Carbon Sun Oct 27 06:19:35 2013 No.6117531

>>6117041
>he believes IQ is information itself
Yes because if you leave the womb with a high IQ you will know theoretical physics and be potty trained without reading or ever recieving instruction.
Learning doesn't work that way. IQ just makes learning faster...you have to actually want to learn to even use iq, not many are inclined to pick up a book on their own..

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 06:44:03 2013 No.6117550 publications in high impact journals > high iq with nothing to show for it

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 06:53:35 2013 No.6117556 >>6109392 >important

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 07:00:33 2013 No.6117559 >>6110160 I thought DK applied to skill and knowledge, not intelligence.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 07:05:34 2013 No.6117563 >>6112547 >>Oh no, math. Oh no, a book. Help. >>If I don't understand everything at the first glance, I'll never understand it. >TFW I had to study 2 hours a day to complete calc 3&4, as well as Diffe Q H...hold me, /sci/, I'm never going to make it.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 18:58:05 2013 No.6119167 >>6117298 I have a high IQ and I do hard work. You know, these are not mutually exclusive.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 19:04:04 2013 No.6119189 IQ is an instrument for measuring intelligence.

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 22:19:04 2013 No.6119595

>>6112881
Feynman Technique, holistic learning, memory palace etc etc etc. You have to study as many GOOD techniques as possible and only then you start to create a tactic or strategy to learn.

Start doing some research, go after the best guys and interrogate them.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 27 22:21:04 2013 No.6119597 >>6112881 Also, make extreme use of critical thinking in order to aggregate only information and build knowledge that can be properly applied. Remember, you are a fucking human being.

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 22:36:28 2013 No.6119610

>>6119595
>>6119597

These are really important. Also don't assume that as soon as you don't understand something you'll realise that you haven't understood it. Make sure you become consciously aware of the mental patterns that surround not understanding something. In my case I start getting drowsy, quite literally.

Often you can route a misunderstanding when studying back to a word/phrase. I've always found a process of routing the misunderstanding back through definitions the most effective, but again each to their own.

Anonymous Sun Oct 27 23:15:57 2013 No.6119644

>>6119595
Memory palace is just a gimmick. It's a crutch that is good for cramming for tests that require memorization, but it cannot really be called learning.

Feynman technique is very good, however. I'm not sure what holistic learning is, but it sounds like some educational buzzword.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 28 18:08:44 2013 No.6121206 >>6119595 What is the Feynman technique? I never heard of it.

Anonymous Tue Oct 29 01:00:00 2013 No.6121886

>>6117131
>Except that's not what an IQ test advertises to measure. It's supposed to be a measurement of innate/general intelligence.

They are supposed to measure phenotypic general intelligence (g), not innate g.

There are no tests for 'innate' i.e. genotypic g yet, but it's just a matter of time. We found three alleles recently, which together explain... 0.06% of the total variance. So there is a long way to go, but we will get there in the next 20 years or so. That is, China will.

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2013/05/29/science.1235488.abstract

Anonymous Tue Oct 29 01:03:30 2013 No.6121890

>>6117055
>>6117060
These culture loaded questions also measure g. The thing is that pretty much any cognitive test you can think of measures g to some extent. Pooling them together yields a better and better g measure since the error variance cancels out and only the g variance remains. This is the basic principle of g measurement and that is why IQ tests often include a battery of different tests.

The nonverbal tests are especially useful for cross-culture comparisons but are really no better at measuring g. Probably they are worse since they don't sample the same amount of g variance as do the tests that measure a broad composition of subtests.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 29 18:47:49 2013 No.6123238 >>6112919 >the overwhelming majority of /sci/. IQ denialists are only a vocal minority.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 29 19:30:48 2013 No.6123328 >>6123238 false

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 30 07:05:48 2013 No.6124194 >>6123328 On /sci/, they are a vocal majority. So is the press. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_IQ_Controversy,_the_Media_and_Public_Policy_%28book%29

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 30 20:57:57 2013 No.6125471 >>6123328 You confirmed the point.

>>	Carbon Thu Oct 31 03:26:58 2013 No.6126057 >>6123328 The only faggots who believe this "science" psychology majors push, have never taken a high level math course.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 31 03:44:58 2013 No.6126067 >>6126057 What's a "high level math course"?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 31 03:59:58 2013 No.6126075 >>6126067 Hello! The highest possible math course is calculus. Best!

Anonymous Thu Oct 31 04:05:59 2013 No.6126076

Someone with a high IQ is just a likely to employ their problem solving skills to amuse themselves with Jeopardy reruns, investigating ancient aliens or inventing a new crayon color as they are to apply it to actual academic pursuits.

Which is why work ethic and the will to act are stronger indicators of success and everything else that really matters in life.

IQ is a useless metric.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 31 04:46:57 2013 No.6126102 >tfw low-90 IQ >tfw most people outsmart you it's not like i wanted to be a scientist or anything ;_;

>>	Vansinne Thu Oct 31 05:43:57 2013 No.6126137 >>6117531 >muh books get with the time gramps

Anonymous Thu Oct 31 06:27:27 2013 No.6126147

70 million people with a higher IQ. That doesn't mean they are smarter than you. You are intelligence enough to differentiate the two concepts, I hope. In addition, there is more to life than intelligence - like having the right attitude and not being a jealous negative douche - but intelligence helps a lot. Use what you have got my friend and go forth and prosper.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 31 08:12:28 2013 No.6126209 Why are people on /sci/ actually arguing about IQ? http://vserver1.cscs.lsa.umich.edu/~crshalizi/weblog/523.html Leave this ignorant shit-fligning to /pol/.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 31 08:19:58 2013 No.6126213 >>6126209 >2pretentious4me

Anonymous Thu Oct 31 08:20:57 2013 No.6126215

Why are people still arguing about IQ?

In the last 50 years there have been so many clear refutations to IQ that there is literally no reason to be this ignorant about the matter.

http://www.stat.cmu.edu/~brian/Pmka-Attack-V71-N3/pmka-2006-71.3-425-440-borsboom.pdf

http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Thurstone/

http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~cwinship/cfa_papers/causalinference.pdf

http://www.hss.cmu.edu/philosophy/glymour/glymour1998.pdf

http://vserver1.cscs.lsa.umich.edu/~crshalizi/weblog/523.html

You are all faggots. Kill yourselves.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 31 08:22:28 2013 No.6126218 >>6126213 Shut up you fucking moron.

Anonymous Thu Oct 31 08:24:28 2013 No.6126220

>>6126218

>Anyone who wanders into the bleak and monotonous desert of IQ and the nature-vs-nurture dispute eventually gets trapped in the especially arid question of what, if anything, g, the supposed general factor of intelligence, tells us about these matters. By calling g a "statistical myth" before, I made clear my conclusion, but none of my reasoning. This topic being what it is, I hardly expect this will change anyone's mind, but I feel a duty to explain myself.

Tell me you can read that without thinking "This guy's such a faggot,"

PROTIP: You can't.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 31 08:31:57 2013 No.6126226 >>6126215 >Why are people still arguing about IQ? >He says, whilst making an argument about IQ Ah, the irony.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 31 08:41:58 2013 No.6126239 >>6126226 I dont need to make arguments pleb i have scientists to that for me checkmate Hang up your fedora, you're done.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 31 08:43:28 2013 No.6126241 >>6126239 >checkmate >implying there aren't several studies done by other just as reputable scientists to contradict your citations.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 31 08:46:57 2013 No.6126244 >>6126239 >Can't into punctuation. >Mad. >Takes ten minutes to come up with a rebuttal. >Resorts to insults. Confirmed for < 100 IQ.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 31 08:47:28 2013 No.6126246 >>6126241 Well ill be waiting right here to play citation wars with you gay turbonerd.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 31 08:48:28 2013 No.6126248 >>6126244 punctuation is for insecure commoners

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 31 08:49:28 2013 No.6126251 File: 8 KB, 235x176, computer2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6126246 Ah ha, you're cute.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 31 09:00:58 2013 No.6126265 >>6126248 Sydj ahz eurcelf

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 1 05:40:16 2013 No.6128109 >>6126265 Please speak English.

Anonymous Fri Nov 1 07:15:23 2013 No.6128195

Having a high IQ doesn't suddenly open new doors to you.

It doesn't bring you happiness
It doesn't bring fullness to your life
It doesn't give you peace of mind
It doesn't find you love

I have an IQ of 135, I am severely depressed, very unhappy, and see no point to my life.

I can't translate my "intelligence" to grades, I lock up at tests, I am constantly failing.

But despite this, I am considered as highly intelligent by my peers, in fact I am defeated grade-wise by the very people who seek me for help with their studies. The ironic thing is, I have a deep enjoyment for learning new thing and understanding more.

But I contend, the main contributing factor that attributes to great intelligence (not necessarily IQ, or the way others perceive you)..
Honestly its curiosity, not just finding out random facts, but constantly questioning and finding out why things are the way they are, what are the rules that govern them, and having a genuine thirst to understand and learn, if you're a natural explorer as a child you'll understand such a drive to discover and understand new things.

Being constantly inquisitive and constantly re-assessing your position on many things, understanding even that common sense intuitions may be mistaken.

Imagination and creativity also plays a pivotal role, more so your ability to see things that others may miss, or somehow find that certain pieces fit or are compatible that others may overlook.

There are other factors too, but I find no motivation to further explain, my apologies. please feel free to add anything I've missed.

ill open another bottle of scotch for you guys, don't worry too much my fellow /sci/entists

Anonymous Fri Nov 1 07:41:52 2013 No.6128214

>>6128195
Same here Anon. Also a very high IQ. Everybody comes to me when they don't understand something and I can give them the correct answer and how I got to the answer most of the time but when I have to prove it on a piece of paper, I just shut down. Not only does this lead to poor grades but I hate myself because I understand every goddamn thing. I just freeze up when it's test time.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 1 08:44:23 2013 No.6128261 >>6128195 stale pasta

>>	Carbon Fri Nov 1 09:16:53 2013 No.6128288 >>6126067 I'm not about to argue semantics anon.. How about we define that fragment of my statement as something that you cannot take in high school.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 1 09:19:53 2013 No.6128297 >>6128261 Doesn't make it not true.

Anonymous Fri Nov 1 09:37:53 2013 No.6128317

>IQ
>not a shitty excuse to being either an underachieving sheep or a pompous prick

I don't care how low your IQ is if you aren't some seriously disabled person or a drug additict. You should be working your ass off and contributing to society in some way.

Fucking psychologist giving people reasons not to be a better individual.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 1 09:44:23 2013 No.6128324 >>6128288 Just stop being vague then.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 1 09:55:23 2013 No.6128332 >>6128195 Holy shit, are you me? I can't get myself to do anything, because I always think about the expected results and then I realize that they won't make me happy.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 1 10:02:53 2013 No.6128341 >>6128317 >be drug addict >have IQ of 141 >still not a good excuse for not working my ass off

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 1 10:26:53 2013 No.6128353 >>6109486 exact opposite here i read i remember for fking ever

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 1 10:48:53 2013 No.6128384 >>6128297 The thing is it isn't even pasta, I am here drunk off my face and I still managed to give some insight to some people... but nooo its fuckin pasta... and no sauce

Anonymous Fri Nov 1 10:53:24 2013 No.6128395

>>6128332
I am in fact you, anon,

You know what you would be doing if I were in your position, since I am you.

Get yourself a kayak, a decent one, take up fishing.

Go at night out to sea far from land and fish, and enjoy not having anything to do with people.

..I have the worst fucking headache...

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 1 11:51:24 2013 No.6128450 >>6108771 Shouldn't you be grateful that there are smarter people out there? When I read nuclear and particle physics textbook I am very happy I didn't have to figure all that shit out myself.

>>	Dubking Fri Nov 1 12:26:53 2013 No.6128501 >>6109570 >retardation check your privilege, however there is no "lulz" on [s4s], only lels

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 2 12:40:40 2013 No.6130569 >>6128450 When I read nuclear and particle physics textbook I cringe because their theories are so naive and oversimplified.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 2 22:07:45 2013 No.6131448 >>6128288 >How about we define that fragment of my statement as something that you cannot take in high school. All of math can be theoretically taken in high school.

>>	Anonymous Sun Nov 3 16:15:58 2013 No.6133056 >>6128288 Do you really think you're a maths genius for taking one university math class?

>>	Anonymous Sun Nov 3 16:22:58 2013 No.6133076 File: 8 KB, 622x77, 124136161262.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] can you help me? S = {{},{1},{2},{3},{1,2},{1,3},{2,3},{1,2,3}} but you probably know

Anonymous Sun Nov 3 16:24:58 2013 No.6133086

>>6117563
> 2 hours a day
I don't know if you are doing other areas of math or just 2 hours of math overall but I practice math 5 hours a day and still think its not enough.

>Answering this guy's math question.
>He still does not get it.
>Wow anon you're very lucky to be born with high intelligence that you understand stuff right away. Not many of us are lucky like you.

No you asshole I just work hard and you are fucking lazy.

>>	Anonymous Sun Nov 3 16:34:58 2013 No.6133124 >>6133076 guys

>>	Anonymous Sun Nov 3 16:39:58 2013 No.6133142 >>6133124 i knew this was all talk, just like the other boards

>>	Anonymous Sun Nov 3 21:00:23 2013 No.6133831 >>6130569 i hate when textbooks of any kind try to tell you how to think you know what i mean

>>	Anonymous Mon Nov 4 15:08:25 2013 No.6135402 >>6133086 I spend exactly 0 hours a day doing math and I still get straight A's.

>>	Anonymous Mon Nov 4 15:30:55 2013 No.6135448 >>6135402 So.... 59 minutes a day then?

Anonymous Tue Nov 5 02:33:29 2013 No.6136934

>>6112856
You forgot the part where the first man was born to an alcoholic father who beat him until he became strong enough to fight back. Also the part where he had trouble throughout all of school, and was expelled from university towards the beginning of his terms, how he never had friends or anyone to relate to until he met his wife and left society to live on a farm.

Perhaps there is a correlation with IQ and philosophical wisdom.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 5 03:35:36 2013 No.6137021 >>6109009 top lel

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 5 03:38:07 2013 No.6137027 Wow this is still alive? I made this thread ages ago.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 5 08:00:07 2013 No.6137332 >>6137027 Welcome to /sci/

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 5 08:07:06 2013 No.6137340 >>6109392 This guy knows what he's talking about. He must have a high IQ.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 5 08:43:37 2013 No.6137366 >>6109487 no websites, you need to take the most recently normed tests timed by a psychologist. otherwise your score doesn't mean dick.

>>	Anonymous Wed Nov 6 02:31:25 2013 No.6139129 >>6137366 Online IQ tests are of higher accuracy.

>>	Anonymous Wed Nov 6 12:32:34 2013 No.6139866 >>6139129 Don't waste your time with that plebeian, my fellow high IQer.

>>	Anonymous Wed Nov 6 20:13:01 2013 No.6140718 >>6137027 You posted a very popular topic and /sci/ is a very slow board.

>>	Anonymous Wed Nov 6 21:41:03 2013 No.6140889 >>6126067 IMO number theory you name it anything more then x in your perspective.

>>	Anonymous Wed Nov 6 22:00:05 2013 No.6140935 >>6109422 Brother.

>>	Anonymous Wed Nov 6 22:04:31 2013 No.6140943 >>6109391 but...but... 999... = 1

>>	Anonymous Wed Nov 6 22:19:01 2013 No.6140969 >>6117180 >electrical engineering wow

>>	Anonymous Wed Nov 6 22:41:32 2013 No.6141003 asdasd

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 7 02:09:18 2013 No.6141241 How high of an IQ do you really need to be rich & successful? Surely top 1% is enough to live lavishly and be able to choose virtually any career field you desire. And what other measure of mutable ability does society reward you for?

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 7 02:43:48 2013 No.6141268 Thinking you are abnormally smart and taking pride in your intelligence is one of the best ways to ruin yourself, OP.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 7 02:51:49 2013 No.6141271 Why does 4chan circle-jerk over IQ?

Anonymous Thu Nov 7 02:55:49 2013 No.6141273
File: 112 KB, 250x339, 250px-Hurleylost.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6141271
It's an easy way to feel you're worth something, and it makes the fall when you mess up all the worse.

>tfw speaking from experience

>mfw don't ever consider yourself exceptionally intelligent

>mfw be like hurley

>>	Carbon Thu Nov 7 10:38:56 2013 No.6141635 >>6141271 /pol/ believes IQ in itself makes you "smart" rather than opening a book and studying and that it doesn't simply mean that you just don't have to study as much(but you still have to study) to understand a concept

>>	Newt !!lzWX0y2YUZW Thu Nov 7 10:42:56 2013 No.6141640 >>6141635 /pol/doesn't equate IQ with knowledge or how educated you are. No one does , you filthy retard.

Anonymous Thu Nov 7 10:44:57 2013 No.6141644

>>6108771
So what about basic math is so upsetting?

There are a bit over 7 billion people. Yes, if you're the very lowest slot in the top 1%, there are a bit over 70 million smarter people than you.

Why is basic math surprising? I kind of doubt you're as high as you think you are now.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 7 11:03:57 2013 No.6141661 File: 43 KB, 480x360, depressed.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >98 IQ >Tfw people still try to lie to you and tell you you're smart

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 7 11:05:57 2013 No.6141666 >>6109419 >Learn and study something interesting >Forget everything you learned the next day

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 7 11:43:57 2013 No.6141705 >>6141661 you cant be that dumb, honestly anyone who can admit theyre not super intelligent is probably not a complete retard

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 7 12:01:28 2013 No.6141723 >>6141705 Or else they have very honest and persuasive friends.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 7 12:14:27 2013 No.6141731 >>6109487 IQtest.dk NIGGA

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 7 18:18:05 2013 No.6142499 >>6141731 iqtest.dk isn't accurate

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 7 18:21:04 2013 No.6142504 >>6141731 no web based IQ tests are accurate, breh. only proctored tests in real life.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 7 22:50:31 2013 No.6142957 >>6141241 Hard work. It is also genetic, but less so than intelligence. Low agreeableness also leads to higher incomes. Similarly heritable as hardworkingness.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 7 22:59:01 2013 No.6142968 >>6117180 >I just aimed for the knee point of the effort / returns scale. my academic life

Anonymous Thu Nov 7 23:01:02 2013 No.6142973

>>6119610

>Make sure you become consciously aware of the mental patterns that surround not understanding something. In my case I start getting drowsy, quite literally.

Can you talk more about this?
I have the same problem. What do you do? Teach me your ways!

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 7 23:04:02 2013 No.6142978 wait until you find out people dumber than you are richer

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 8 00:06:01 2013 No.6143054 >>6142978 I'm 21 with a 110 iq and I got $350,000 from bitcoins so far, probably more by now haven't checked in a few days.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 8 00:19:35 2013 No.6143071 >>6143054 did you take 35k in credit cards and sell when high?

Anonymous Fri Nov 8 00:24:32 2013 No.6143078

>>6143071
Ohh I still haven't sold, no I've just been mining for several years. Someone told me about 2 years ago it wasn't worth the electricity to mine anymore, but i don't care I just keep mining and keep getting bankrolled, when I need to buy something I buy it in bitcoins, I don't even know why i would use ash, that goes down in value. I just talk in dollar values barbecues most people still use dollars

Anonymous Fri Nov 8 00:28:02 2013 No.6143085

>>6143078
The reason I asked was because some guy on reddit was in student loan and said fuck it. I'll use the good credit I have and max out a few credit cards on bit coins at ~14$. Some time later they shot up to 200$. He posted his story on reddit and everyone got rustled.

I'd sell though, there is more trust in the mighty dollar.

Anonymous Fri Nov 8 00:32:01 2013 No.6143090

>>6143085
I respect your opinion but if you only knew how many times people have told me that, every single one of my friends and family told me that multiple times, even some guys who claimed they were experts in stock or fourX something don't remember. Sorry man I just gonna do what i do which is mine bitcoins.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 8 00:52:02 2013 No.6143112 >>6143090 You can keep mining, it's not like you get less coins if you cash out. I just think the dollar is safer and more robust.

Anonymous Fri Nov 8 01:09:02 2013 No.6143125

>>6143112
For one thing, if I cashed out I would have to pay taxes on all this money supposedly. Or that's what I was told, I would also loose my welfare payments. As far as I can tell bitcoin might go to over 10,000 a coin or that's what some guys I trust who have been with me a long time have said.

I can buy everything I need with bitcoins even my landlord takes bitcoins, and I just eat with my ebt card, and buy gas and other stuff with my TANF allowance and I get about 600 a month in bipolar / autism disability payments for stuff like gas and car (I bought my car with bitcoins).

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 8 01:16:50 2013 No.6143129 >>6143125 swaq

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 8 22:23:10 2013 No.6144969 >>6143054 Bitcoins are worth nothing.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 8 22:30:09 2013 No.6144977 >>6144969 money is worth nothing

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 8 22:39:40 2013 No.6144987 >>6143125 your kind needs to be euthanized

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 8 22:41:39 2013 No.6144991 Let's talk about fluid and crystallized intelligence theory and how the IQ test fails to separate the two therefore has a severe flaw in its measure of intellect.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 9 06:13:41 2013 No.6145594 >>6144991 Various tests have been made that attempt to measure one or the other. But the theory is wrong. g is on the top of the hierarchy, not g_f or g_c in a dual role.

Anonymous Sat Nov 9 09:57:30 2013 No.6145813

IQ is the best measurement of intelligence we currently have. But, it's still not perfect and that's why I'm not going to take such a test.

Countries with worse education also score worse on IQ tests. This proves that environmental factors are still present. Also, I don't understand why you should do a test anyway. How difficult is it to guess your intelligence yourself? Why would you need a confirmation?

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 9 18:04:59 2013 No.6146671 >>6144987 back to /pol/ hitler

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 9 19:00:31 2013 No.6146818 >>6141705 Bologna. It's called fishing for compliments. "You sure don't sound like someone with a low IQ." I see it all of the time on here.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 9 19:08:30 2013 No.6146832 >>6145813 IQ is the best measurement of cognition we currently have. What makes up intelligence is subjective.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 9 19:12:00 2013 No.6146845 Since this is the general... >>6146777

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 9 19:19:30 2013 No.6146863 Online IQ tests mean nothing. You are not in the 1%.

>>	Anonymous Sun Nov 10 14:52:03 2013 No.6148491 >>6146863 Not all online tests are shit.

Anonymous Sun Nov 10 14:55:32 2013 No.6148501

>>6110206
there really needs to be something called the Dunning-Kruger-effect effect, which refers to the tendency of people to reflectively cite the Dunning-Kruger effect to imply that they're smart and other people are stupid.

also known as the /sci/ effect

>>	Anonymous Mon Nov 11 14:44:53 2013 No.6150788 >>6148501 I agree. "Dunning Kruger effect" is one of the most overused buzzwords.

>>	Anonymous Mon Nov 11 14:56:54 2013 No.6150807 >>6150788 buzzword itself is a buzzword

>>	Anonymous Mon Nov 11 15:03:54 2013 No.6150815 >>6150807 I hate people.

>>	Anonymous Mon Nov 11 15:13:54 2013 No.6150829 >>6113056 an idiot

>>	Anonymous Mon Nov 11 15:19:24 2013 No.6150836 >>6148491 You should know it, are you sure you scored top 1%?

Anonymous Mon Nov 11 15:42:24 2013 No.6150866

>>6108771

I don't get it, why do people do IQ tests? They often lower your confidence and limit you in what you can do.

It's better to live as a fool than know the truth and suffer forever. Maybe even go insane.

As they say, few men can handle the truth.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 05:00:48 2013 No.6152084 >>6150866 >I don't get it, why do people do IQ tests? For science. >They often lower your confidence and limit you in what you can do. They raise our confidence because we are smart.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 05:04:48 2013 No.6152091 >>6143054 Up to $450,000 now

Anonymous Tue Nov 12 09:10:18 2013 No.6152290

>>6150866
>I don't get it, why do people do IQ tests? They often lower your confidence and limit you in what you can do.

Job interviews, military draft, self-knowledge, gifted program entrance, university entrance, exclusive club entrance (Mensa etc.), diagnostic reasons, and lots of children take them so we can learn more about the long-term effects of intelligence.

Anonymous Tue Nov 12 09:19:17 2013 No.6152298

>>6133086

most people are just really vain dude. much like people lie about having photographic memories and other dumb shit even though there's never been a documented case of it, people got the ego where they want to feel special by saying they never work hard and get all their shit done or the people that don't work at all and blame it on everyone else being so gifted.

ya gotta put in the hours.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 09:42:47 2013 No.6152327 >Dad's IQ 160+ >Aren't you gonna get yours tested too, Anon? You'll probably join Mensa as well. >N-no, it's fine. What if I don't live up to it? I doubt I'll even come close. Not even close to coming close.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 11:26:17 2013 No.6152449 >>6152327 well your ego will be hurt. big deal.

Anonymous Tue Nov 12 11:45:48 2013 No.6152474

>>6109419

If my contribution to the world be to create the best plays written in Portuguese; if I become some sort of Portuguese-Shakespeare (the best sculptor of metaphors, similes, imagery and characters of my language), can I be pleased with myself when the time of death arrives?

Or will I still be shit if I do not become a theoretical scientist?

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 14:52:16 2013 No.6152779 >Mutant IQ >Still mumbles in front of girls >4chan_inabottle.exe

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 15:08:17 2013 No.6152806 Can anyone please explain to me why we assume intelligence is normally distributed, or explain how this is been demonstrated at some point?

Anonymous Tue Nov 12 15:56:47 2013 No.6152915

>>6152806
>Can anyone please explain to me why we assume intelligence is normally distributed, or explain how this is been demonstrated at some point?

We don't assume "intelligence" is normally distributed. IQ is normally distributed by definition, though.

Basically, you get the set of all IQ test results, and rank them. Then you just assign a score by making a normal distribution with mean 100 and standard deviation 15 or 16. If you do better than 50% of the population, your score is 100. If you do better than 64.1% of the population, your score is 115/116.

There is no assumption whatsoever that, for example the difference between 100 and 110 is the same as the difference between 110 and 120. But the majority of people misunderstand IQ in that way, including most of the retards on /sci/ who talk about it all the time.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 16:02:47 2013 No.6152933 >>6152915 >We don't assume "intelligence" is normally distributed. IQ is normally distributed by definition, though. Are you fucking retarded? That definition is exactly what it means to assume that intelligence is normally distributed

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 16:03:16 2013 No.6152937 >>6152933 >That definition is exactly what it means to assume that intelligence is normally distributed How do you figure?

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 16:05:46 2013 No.6152941 >>6152937 Do you have a problem with the English language? If you do not understand the contents of what has been posted, then don't reply.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 16:10:47 2013 No.6152947 >>6152941 I think you're confused, friend. Say explicitly what you mean.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 16:11:16 2013 No.6152950 >>6152947 The question has been posted in >>6152806. You did not understand the question. Please learn English.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 16:18:18 2013 No.6152958 >>6152950 I answered the question accurately. Maybe you didn't understand the answer? Are you the anon who asked it?

Anonymous Tue Nov 12 16:35:17 2013 No.6152997

>>6152958
>I answered the question accurately.
No, you did not. You failed to understand it and your answer demonstrates nothing but your general defectiveness in the areas of verbal comprehension and logical thinking. "Hurr durr we don't assume but in our definition we do" is a statement that could hardly be more retarded.

>Are you the anon who asked it?
No.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 16:40:16 2013 No.6153008 >>6152997 You seem to be under the impression that IQ is the definition of intelligence and that it's numerical value represents some tangible quantity. Both are incorrect, as I already explained. So it kind of seems like you're the retarded one.

Anonymous Tue Nov 12 16:43:17 2013 No.6153015

>>6153008
Your retardation is truly painful to read. In cognitive science and clinical psychiatry intelligence is defined, measured and quantified by IQ. If you fail hard in the areas of pattern recognition, verbal comprehension. logic, spatial reasoning etc, then you are clinically retarded. This is how the medical diagnosis of mental retardation is defined. And given your posts ITT you are failing them epically. Fucking deal with it and stop spamming anti-science bullshit.

Anonymous Tue Nov 12 16:49:17 2013 No.6153032

>>6153008
>You seem to be under the impression that IQ is the definition of intelligence
This is the operational definition we are using in cognitive psychology, cognitive neuroscience and psychiatry.

>and that it's numerical value represents some tangible quantity.
Hundreds of studies have shown the predictive power of IQ with respect to academic success and future socio-ecomonic status.

>Both are incorrect, as I already explained.
Your baseless assertions are meaningless and do not explain anything. "Lol its wrong bcause I don't want to believe it" is not an argument. You're talking to adults with academic education.

>So it kind of seems like you're the retarded one.
This projection couldn't be more hilarious.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 16:53:47 2013 No.6153041 >>6153008 >IQ denialism >on a science board WTF is this shit? Why don't you stay on /pol/ with all the other science haters? You'd fit right in with the creationists and AGW deniers.

Anonymous Tue Nov 12 17:02:16 2013 No.6153061

>>6153032
>This is the operational definition we are using in cognitive psychology, cognitive neuroscience and psychiatry.

It actually isn't. It's something we use in lieu of "measurement" of intelligence and it's useful, but no psychologist would call it the definition of intelligence.

>Hundreds of studies have shown the predictive power of IQ with respect to academic success and future socio-ecomonic status.

You misunderstand. I'm not saying it's meaningless, I'm saying the number itself does not represent a real quantity in the way that, for example, height is. It makes sense to say that someone is 10 inches taller than someone else, but saying someone's IQ is 10 points higher doesn't tell you much of anything. They are smarter, probably, but it doesn't tel you HOW MUCH smarter.

It's like Moh's hardness scale - it tells you who is "smarter" (kind of), but it doesn't provide an absolute measure, just an order.

Anonymous Tue Nov 12 17:05:48 2013 No.6153065

>>6153061
>but no psychologist would call it the definition of intelligence.
I know psychologists who do. Therefore your statement is wrong.

>I'm saying the number itself does not represent a real quantity in the way that, for example, height is
It represents the quantity "intelligence".

>but it doesn't tel you HOW MUCH smarter.
It does. You can say exactly "person A is 10 IQ points smarter than person B". Do you not understand what a quantitative measurement is?

Anonymous Tue Nov 12 17:14:46 2013 No.6153087

>>6153065
>I know psychologists who do.

No you don't.

>It represents the quantity "intelligence".

No it doesn't.

> You can say exactly "person A is 10 IQ points smarter than person B". Do you not understand what a quantitative measurement is?

IQ is an ordinal scale, not a quantitative measurement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinal_scale#Ordinal_scale

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 17:27:17 2013 No.6153120 Don't worry about IQ. Worry about helping others and fostering peace among nations. Use your talents to aid others!

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 17:31:17 2013 No.6153132 >>6153120 this is terrible advice. you must take the iq test and do nothing but feel smug and superior about your iq.

Anonymous Tue Nov 12 17:33:16 2013 No.6153136

>>6153087

So to expand on the implications of that by example:

Say you were to round up everyone with an IQ under 95 and over 105 and execute them. After you did that, the IQ distribution would remain exactly the same. The person who used to have an IQ of 101 now has an IQ of 115 (or something - haven't done the math). He hasn't gotten any smarter, of course, but now he's a SD above mean, because the SD, while still being "IQ points" represents a much smaller difference in real intelligence.

Anonymous Tue Nov 12 19:35:16 2013 No.6153380

dude, i scored in the 96th percentile n the ACT and im in my junior year of engineering school. There can be only one "best" but you are "better" than 99/100 ppl you meet on the street stastically.

now get off your ass and into STEM, we have shit to do.

STEM NEEDS YOU MOTHERFUCKER

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 19:41:47 2013 No.6153391 >tfw have a 140 IQ but my adhd essentials cancels it out

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 19:54:47 2013 No.6153432 >>6152915 But if we don't know how intelligence is distributed, what is the point of trying to charactarise it with a variable we define to be normally distributed? What does IQ measure then, if not intelligence?

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 20:53:48 2013 No.6153509 >>6153087 IQ is not an ordinal scale. It's an interval scale. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_measurement#Interval_scale

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 21:01:16 2013 No.6153534 >>6108771 >tfw top .1% IQ >tfw there are still 7 million people smarter than you Where the fuck are all these people and why are none of them attractive females

Anonymous Tue Nov 12 21:01:46 2013 No.6153531

>>6153432
Intelligence is not normally distributed 'by definition', it is empirical fact.

One normally constructs tests so as to give normalized results. But one does this exactly because intelligence is normally distributed and having another test design would make it a worse measurement tool.

Still, the premier reference is Jensen 1980 "Bias in mental testing".

>>6153136
Does this would seriously affect reality. But it will normalize within a few generations due to regression toward the mean.

>>6153065
Psychologists do not normally define "intelligence" as IQ, and for good reason. That would get you into all kinds of trouble with e.g. training effects. Training effects are not increases in intelligence, but they are increases in IQ scores. It's a hollow gain that isn't g-loaded.

>>6153041
Yes.

Intelligence search is one of the areas where most people have an opinion but almost know one has read anything.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 21:07:16 2013 No.6153543 >>6153531 >Intelligence is not normally distributed 'by definition', it is empirical fact. What method was used to measure intelligence objectively, yielding a normal distribution, without artificially making it normally distributed like IQ is?

Anonymous Tue Nov 12 21:21:17 2013 No.6153576

>>6153543
I wonder if I already gave a reference, oh yes!

>Still, the premier reference is Jensen 1980 "Bias in mental testing".

Go read that if you want answers.

http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Bias-in-Mental-Testing-Arthur-R.-Jensen.pdf

It's the chapter about the distribution of mental ability.

Anonymous Tue Nov 12 21:41:16 2013 No.6153605

>>6153576

Your reference has distributions that are aproximately normal, and one can clearly see negative skewness in most of them. As a result, everyone claiming to be in the top blablabla percentile is talking shit, because we don't know the distribution of intelligence to the accuracy we need to determine that. You see the same skewness in his height and weight examples

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 21:52:47 2013 No.6153614 >tfw top 0.5% IQ >tfw perpetually unemployed friendless college dropout Damn it feels good to be smart. I bet you all wish you were me.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 22:12:48 2013 No.6153643 >>6153534 >tfw top .01% IQ >tfw there are still 700,000 people smarter than you

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 22:14:48 2013 No.6153645 >>6153643 >tfw top .001% IQ >tfw there are still 70,000 people smarter than you

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 22:15:46 2013 No.6153648 >>6153645 >tfw top .0001% IQ >tfw there are still 7,000 people smarter than you

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 22:16:18 2013 No.6153652 >tfw bottom .0000001% >tfw there are still 7 people dumber than you Feels potato, man.

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 22:16:47 2013 No.6153650 >>6153648 >tfw top .00001% IQ >tfw there are still 700 people smarter than you

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 22:17:17 2013 No.6153654 >>6153650 >tfw top .000001% IQ >tfw there are still 70 people smarter than you

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 22:19:18 2013 No.6153661 >>6153654 >tfw top .0000001% IQ >tfw there are still 7 people smarter than you

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 22:19:46 2013 No.6153658 >>6153654 >tfw top 0.0000001% IQ >tfw there are still 0.7 people smarter than you

>>	Anonymous Tue Nov 12 22:21:18 2013 No.6153664 File: 1.94 MB, 180x230, 1373171461041.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6153658 top kek

Anonymous Wed Nov 13 01:32:22 2013 No.6153957

>>6153605
Small amounts of negative skew is really not a big problem. The distribution of ability is still approximately normal. It is known that the left tail is fatter due to a number of genetic defects causing huge decreases in intelligence (e.g. Down's Syndrome). You see the same for height (dwarfism, growth hormone problems).

We know it well enough to know that, yes. We have given tests to hundreds of thousands of people and have great data on how the distribution looks like.

>>	Anonymous Wed Nov 13 01:34:52 2013 No.6153961 >>6135402 Sounds like you're in high school maths.

>>	Anonymous Wed Nov 13 20:16:32 2013 No.6155582 >>6153961 It is hilarious how you have to resort to projections because you cannot accept the fact that highly gifted people are by definition more intelligent than you.

>>	Anonymous Wed Nov 13 20:23:31 2013 No.6155614 >>6153661 >tfw top .00000001% IQ >tfw there is a decapitated birth defected son of a bitch out there smarter than you

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 14 03:12:12 2013 No.6156210 >tfw top 0% IQ >tfw I am smarter than myself

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 14 18:34:42 2013 No.6157442 >>6153531 >Intelligence search is one of the areas where most people have an opinion but almost know one has read anything. This should be the first line of every IQ thread.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 15 05:13:10 2013 No.6158534 I am one of these 70 million people.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 15 22:24:19 2013 No.6160022 >>6108776 How about IQ + hard work?

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 15 22:50:27 2013 No.6160062 >>6150815 >>6150807 >>6150788 >>6148501 >>6110206 >>6110160 >Ctrl-f "Dunning Kruger" You never let me down /sci/...

Anonymous Fri Nov 15 22:58:26 2013 No.6160077

>>6112856
>>6113076
>>6115206

God, stop being so naive you dumb fucks. Richard Feynman's IQ was well above 125. He just wanted to rub it in people's face that he could score low on an IQ test and still be a badass and in fact look better. This still doesn't give any more legitimacy to IQ tests.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 15 23:01:56 2013 No.6160082 >>6110313 I hate this fucker.

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