Is it important to know your IQ?
No.LooF wrote:is that for me?
well im sorry ,_,
I will never validate any comment made by one person that portends to be speaking for others.DavidQuinn000 wrote:You must be awfully thin-skinned. They were all reasonable responses, given the context.
Are you going to explain why you consider your question to be important? Or are you just going to play games with us?
-
-
David Quinn
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
-
Diebert van Rhijn
- Posts: 6469
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm
Cats, I just saw you asked me something a while back. Must have missed it the first time.
Without this context, the question does not make sense to me. And this explains maybe the type of responses you got so far, which were mostly poking fun and probing you a bit, gauging reaction perhaps. This is a behavior you might expect from intelligent people, in my opinion.
It all depends on your motive to measure these specific abilities. Are you going to use it as conversation piece, for a job interview, career planning or perhaps membership of organisations like Mensa?catsndogs wrote: So the first time one gets tested, is it reasonable to always go ahead and do the test? Could it possibily be that when the first time one gets tested is just as important as the test itself?
Without this context, the question does not make sense to me. And this explains maybe the type of responses you got so far, which were mostly poking fun and probing you a bit, gauging reaction perhaps. This is a behavior you might expect from intelligent people, in my opinion.
-
Leyla Shen
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
-
Leyla Shen
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Oh, I get it. It’s wise because most people are stupid -- unlike yourself -- and will not be able to consider the possibility that I was, in fact, answering on my behalf and not theirs. This being in place, the question undoubtedly would have elicited more responses from individual posters for statistical purposes, therefore.
Why on earth didn’t I think of that?
Why on earth didn’t I think of that?
-
MKFaizi
I took an online IQ test and my IQ is 88. Close to mentally retarded.
I actually do not think that I am all that mentally retarded. I do not do well with questions of logic of the kind -- If all flips are flops and some flops are flips" or whatever.
For one thing, I don't give a shit. For another, it just seems like far too linear an exercise -- like playing video games -- not good at those either. My daughter and son are quite good at them.
Last, I reckon I am simply mentally retarded. Maybe, I can go on welfare.
Faizi
I actually do not think that I am all that mentally retarded. I do not do well with questions of logic of the kind -- If all flips are flops and some flops are flips" or whatever.
For one thing, I don't give a shit. For another, it just seems like far too linear an exercise -- like playing video games -- not good at those either. My daughter and son are quite good at them.
Last, I reckon I am simply mentally retarded. Maybe, I can go on welfare.
Faizi
-
sue hindmarsh
- Posts: 1083
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 9:02 am
- Location: Sous Le Soleil
Really a pretty good assessment, perhaps what is missing would be three dots ....sue hindmarsh wrote:The minds of people with high IQs are very similar to those minds belonging to really attractive people - extremely shallow and self possessed.
Sue
....when it comes to letting others lead.sue hindmarsh wrote:The minds of people with high IQs are very similar to those minds belonging to really attractive people - extremely shallow and self possessed....Sue
-
MKFaizi
-
MKFaizi
I think Sue's statement is largely true and it is well stated.
I have a thirty plus year old nephew who just loves IQ tests. He is very good at them. He loves those logic exercises and they are easy for him. Definitely Mensa material with an IQ of more than 140 or so.
Little wonder in that. If you love doing something, you are probably going to be good at it. He loves little logic exercises.
To be fair, my nephew is somewhat of a thinker. I put a curse on him at birth to insure that.
He has balls enough to drive around with atheist stickers on his car bumper here in the Bible Belt. I am actually surprised that he has not been shot. I give him some credit for that. But his IQ has little to do with that. He could do the same thing with an average IQ. He has been diagnosed as Bipolar by the way. I think that's a crock. I think he is more of a depressive, like me. But not a retard like me.
If I was especially good at quilting and I took an IQ test based on quiltiing, I reckon I would do very well on that IQ test.
I cannot see that, because a person is good at little exercises in linear logic, they are superior in intelligence.
The Green River killer was a man with a low IQ. Yet, he was at large and continued to kill for about twenty years before he was arrested. All the "best" minds tracked him without success for nearly twenty years. He certainly was not dumb.
One thing that puzzles me is mental retardation in its mild-moderate form. I have some mentally retarded people as patients who ask very pertinent and average-intelligence medical questions. They are considered to be mentally handicapped but they are not dumb. They are pretty smart.
How are they mentally retarded when they can ask as good or better medical questions as average intelligence people?
Could they do my job? Probably not. But I think that is more a problem of social skills than intelligence. These people live on their own and work. They have a child who is not mentally retarded and a grandchild who is not mentally retarded.
I think much of what is considered to be mental retardation is actually social retardation.
Faizi
I have a thirty plus year old nephew who just loves IQ tests. He is very good at them. He loves those logic exercises and they are easy for him. Definitely Mensa material with an IQ of more than 140 or so.
Little wonder in that. If you love doing something, you are probably going to be good at it. He loves little logic exercises.
To be fair, my nephew is somewhat of a thinker. I put a curse on him at birth to insure that.
He has balls enough to drive around with atheist stickers on his car bumper here in the Bible Belt. I am actually surprised that he has not been shot. I give him some credit for that. But his IQ has little to do with that. He could do the same thing with an average IQ. He has been diagnosed as Bipolar by the way. I think that's a crock. I think he is more of a depressive, like me. But not a retard like me.
If I was especially good at quilting and I took an IQ test based on quiltiing, I reckon I would do very well on that IQ test.
I cannot see that, because a person is good at little exercises in linear logic, they are superior in intelligence.
The Green River killer was a man with a low IQ. Yet, he was at large and continued to kill for about twenty years before he was arrested. All the "best" minds tracked him without success for nearly twenty years. He certainly was not dumb.
One thing that puzzles me is mental retardation in its mild-moderate form. I have some mentally retarded people as patients who ask very pertinent and average-intelligence medical questions. They are considered to be mentally handicapped but they are not dumb. They are pretty smart.
How are they mentally retarded when they can ask as good or better medical questions as average intelligence people?
Could they do my job? Probably not. But I think that is more a problem of social skills than intelligence. These people live on their own and work. They have a child who is not mentally retarded and a grandchild who is not mentally retarded.
I think much of what is considered to be mental retardation is actually social retardation.
Faizi
-
MKFaizi
Rhett-waller,
Could not resist.
Yes, you could easily gain forty points with practice. I might even broach average if I practiced the crap. But damn.
My nephew does very well on these tests because he likes the stuff. He naturally likes it. Like I like growing Hoyas or orchids. He kills plants.
I do not believe that ability is measurement of intelligence.
If that was the case, a gymnast or baton twiller or baseball player could be considered genius.
Genius is reaching for the stars. It is thought. It is ambition without reward.
Faizi
Could not resist.
Yes, you could easily gain forty points with practice. I might even broach average if I practiced the crap. But damn.
My nephew does very well on these tests because he likes the stuff. He naturally likes it. Like I like growing Hoyas or orchids. He kills plants.
I do not believe that ability is measurement of intelligence.
If that was the case, a gymnast or baton twiller or baseball player could be considered genius.
Genius is reaching for the stars. It is thought. It is ambition without reward.
Faizi
-
Diebert van Rhijn
- Posts: 6469
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm
Believe it or not, but intelligence is commonly defined as just that ability. The puzzles mostly try to measure an ability to handle knowledge, abstract relations and logical thought. But just like a common driving test will not prove one is a good driver, an intelligence test mostly measures potential. Real life does not come in square puzzles after all.MKFaizi wrote: I do not believe that ability is measurement of intelligence.
And they are often considered as such in the world outside. Not that you have to agree with that.If that was the case, a gymnast or twiller or baseball player could be considered genius.
Of strong idealism or heavy daydreaming can be said the same.Genius is reaching for the stars. It is thought. It is ambition without reward.
-
MKFaizi
Well, yes. Intelligence is ability but what I said was that I can't see how the specific ability to solve logic exercises denotes intelligence.Believe it or not, but intelligence is commonly defined as just that ability.
I know that I am practially mentally retarded but I knew that. I don't understand WHY it is presumed that solving little logic exercises is supposed to be a measure of intelligence. WHY is that the standard? I can't see how knowing how many floogs are flogs proves anything significant. I mean, swell if you do know how many floogs are flogs but it is kind of ridiculous for those who know floogs and flogs to think of themselves as mentally superior.The puzzles mostly try to measure an ability to handle knowledge, abstract relations and logical thought. But just like a common driving test will not prove one is a good driver, an intelligence test mostly measures potential. Real life does not come in square puzzles after all.
I don't mean to knock it because, maybe if I had scored 160 instead of 88, I would be bragging. But I don't think so.
I am well aware of that. I have watched baseball players play ball brilliantly; dazzingly brilliant. Then, when you see them interviewed, it is plumb amazing to hear them sound like such dullards. I expect them to be talking about Nietzsche or something and there they are chewing tobacco and spitting and scratching their asses.And they -- athletes -- are often considered as such in the world outside. Not that you have to agree with that.
Athletic ability is athletic ability. It has nothing to do with intelligence. I have respect for athletic ability. I no longer have the stomach for it but I used to be a big boxing fan. I appreciate football and baseball.
What is heavy daydreaming? I call it ruminating; mulling; thinking; reasoning.Of strong idealism or heavy daydreaming can be said the same.
Idealism is part of genius.
Faizi
Answer of some detail...
"Is a smart person who knows their IQ less smart than if they didn't know their IQ"
It's all based on the personality of the inidividual. I've observed some who know their IQ is high, and it makes them lazy and unambitious. They don't 'have' to strive for anything, now that they know why some things come so easy to them. With others they be driven to live by the expectations of what society assumes is relevent to having a high IQ.
For both examples, I'd say that knowing their IQ makes them less smart, because they are distracted by it.
The flipside fosters another stereotype of history. All of the greatest inventors, thinkers, and most innovative creators almost always emerged from outside of convention, often at war with it. Nobody sees a real genius as a winner in his own lifetime. It's always best (for society) to wait until this person dies, they enshrine thier accomplishments or observations when the person is no longer around to call them to task for what they are.
If you are brushed off as a loser, have a simple job (or no job) and time to make observations and do something with whatever fires off in your brain, I'd say you're in a better situation.
"and is a less smart person who doesn't know their IQ a bit smarter for not knowing their IQ?"
I don't think a less smart person would give a flip either way, unless they're trying to get a job in a field like defense or the medical field, where personality assessments are often a prerequisite and an IQ may help win or lose the position.
"Is a smart person who knows their IQ less smart than if they didn't know their IQ"
It's all based on the personality of the inidividual. I've observed some who know their IQ is high, and it makes them lazy and unambitious. They don't 'have' to strive for anything, now that they know why some things come so easy to them. With others they be driven to live by the expectations of what society assumes is relevent to having a high IQ.
For both examples, I'd say that knowing their IQ makes them less smart, because they are distracted by it.
The flipside fosters another stereotype of history. All of the greatest inventors, thinkers, and most innovative creators almost always emerged from outside of convention, often at war with it. Nobody sees a real genius as a winner in his own lifetime. It's always best (for society) to wait until this person dies, they enshrine thier accomplishments or observations when the person is no longer around to call them to task for what they are.
If you are brushed off as a loser, have a simple job (or no job) and time to make observations and do something with whatever fires off in your brain, I'd say you're in a better situation.
"and is a less smart person who doesn't know their IQ a bit smarter for not knowing their IQ?"
I don't think a less smart person would give a flip either way, unless they're trying to get a job in a field like defense or the medical field, where personality assessments are often a prerequisite and an IQ may help win or lose the position.
If Steve has an IQ of 82, and Peter has an IQ of 120, and Peter sleeps with Ruth once a day for 28 days, losing 1.5 IQ points every time he sleeps with Ruth, but Steve joins Genius Forums and makes one post every 3 days for a total of 32 days, with every post increasing his IQ by 2 points, who will have the highest IQ exactly 9 months after the first time Peter sleeps with Ruth without using birth control?