Paradoxes involving IQ

[PoetPhilosopher]

I'd like to point out some possible paradoxes involving IQ. Or at least, some things which are food for thought.

The first is that they claim the very high IQs are rare, that you have a 1 in about 32,000 chance of having a 160 or higher IQ. Yet, you frequently see celebrities, and people on tech sites, which claim or are claimed to have such IQs.

The second thing I wanted to talk about is the phenomena of sometimes being considered "dumb" by society just by being smart. This is hard to admit, but as an example, I'm someone who had an exceptionally high IQ, yet didn't learn to tie my shoes until fairly late in life. I was completing full video games at probably under half the age I learned to tie my shoes. I completed Final Fantasy on Super Nintendo, and a bunch of other games including Super Metroid, before I could tie my shoes, or probably even tie a knot.

 

[Revoltingest]

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

LOL.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Another thing that I think isn't necessarily understood by everyone, is that sometimes other people will get offended when one talks about IQ, saying "Boy, you sure like to flout your superior intelligence!", etc, etc, when some of us, including myself, actually consider a high IQ a bit of a handicap in some regards.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Another thing that I think isn't necessarily understood by everyone, is that sometimes other people will get offended when one talks about IQ, saying "Boy, you sure like to flout your superior intelligence!", etc, etc, when some of us, including myself, actually consider a high IQ a bit of a handicap in some regards.

To expand further, imagine not being understood, or being seen as "different", by much of the general population. And it working against you when it comes to employment opportunities, etc (in general).

 

[sayak83]

I'd like to point out some possible paradoxes involving IQ. Or at least, some things which are food for thought.

The first is that they claim the very high IQs are rare, that you have a 1 in about 32,000 chance of having a 160 or higher IQ. Yet, you frequently see celebrities, and people on tech sites, which claim or are claimed to have such IQs.

The second thing I wanted to talk about is the phenomena of sometimes being considered "dumb" by society just by being smart. This is hard to admit, but as an example, I'm someone who had an exceptionally high IQ, yet didn't learn to tie my shoes until fairly late in life. I was completing full video games at probably under half the age I learned to tie my shoes. I completed Final Fantasy on Super Nintendo, and a bunch of other games including Super Metroid, before I could tie my shoes, or probably even tie a knot.

I have a very average iq of about 96-105 (based on if I get bored doing these tests or not). It gives reliable results on repetition at least. But what it is measuring I have no idea. It is supposed to at least measure intelligence relevant to academics. Based on my performance in scholarship tests and academic studies...iq tests do not seem to be a reliable indicator of that. Maybe general intelligence? Then its ok. Because I am just horrible at general intelligence . Most of the time I cannot locate my office cubicle and wander around for 5 mins before bumping into it....

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I have a very average iq of about 96-105 (based on if I get bored doing these tests or not). It gives reliable results on repetition at least. But what it is measuring I have no idea. It is supposed to at least measure intelligence relevant to academics. Based on my performance in scholarship tests and academic studies...iq tests do not seem to be a reliable indicator of that. Maybe general intelligence? Then its ok. Because I am just horrible at general intelligence . Most of the time I cannot locate my office cubicle and wander around for 5 mins before bumping into it....

It definitely surprises me that you only scored 96-105. Reading your posts, I would never suspect that.

Maybe instead of IQ, there needs to be some chart which maps the different processes of thinking different people might have, and one can refer to that. I'd find more practicality in that, than in IQ. (Just speaking in general.)

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

The second thing I wanted to talk about is the phenomena of sometimes being considered "dumb" by society just by being smart. This is hard to admit, but as an example, I'm someone who had an exceptionally high IQ, yet didn't learn to tie my shoes until fairly late in life. I was completing full video games at probably under half the age I learned to tie my shoes. I completed Final Fantasy on Super Nintendo, and a bunch of other games including Super Metroid, before I could tie my shoes, or probably even tie a knot.

Here's a list of smart people who got labelled dumb as a kid:

Thomas Edison
Albert Einstein
Isaac Newton

There are others who had problems, too.

 

[Heyo]

I'd like to point out some possible paradoxes involving IQ. Or at least, some things which are food for thought.

The first is that they claim the very high IQs are rare, that you have a 1 in about 32,000 chance of having a 160 or higher IQ. Yet, you frequently see celebrities, and people on tech sites, which claim or are claimed to have such IQs.

There are 8,000,000,000 people on Earth, i.e. there are ~ 250,000 people with an IQ of 160 or higher. And, having a high IQ they are more likely to become celebrities.

The second thing I wanted to talk about is the phenomena of sometimes being considered "dumb" by society just by being smart.

Sometimes, that what the IQ measures, doesn't translate into being "smart".

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Sometimes, that what the IQ measures, doesn't translate into being "smart".

Yeah. I think a good education is often more important.

To use an analogy, high IQ without an education, is kind of like a PC without an operating system.

 

[Secret Chief]

I'd like to point out some possible paradoxes involving IQ. Or at least, some things which are food for thought.

The first is that they claim the very high IQs are rare, that you have a 1 in about 32,000 chance of having a 160 or higher IQ. Yet, you frequently see celebrities, and people on tech sites, which claim or are claimed to have such IQs.

The second thing I wanted to talk about is the phenomena of sometimes being considered "dumb" by society just by being smart. This is hard to admit, but as an example, I'm someone who had an exceptionally high IQ, yet didn't learn to tie my shoes until fairly late in life. I was completing full video games at probably under half the age I learned to tie my shoes. I completed Final Fantasy on Super Nintendo, and a bunch of other games including Super Metroid, before I could tie my shoes, or probably even tie a knot.

IQ is a very limited "measurement." I was a member of Mensa, godnose why I took the test, I was young and impressionable. I wouldn't put much store by IQ scores. The human mind is a far greater and nuanced entity than a quiz score. I'm more taken with the idea of multiple intelligences...

eg
- Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

IQ is a very limited "measurement." I was a member of MENSA, godnose why I took the test, I was young and impressionable. I wouldn't put much store by IQ scores. The human mind is a far greater and nuanced enitity than a quiz score.

I think I agree.

However, the whole IQ thing kind of changed my life, as well. After it was found out I had a high IQ, I started being treated different academically and at home, which kind of shaped my life and paths a bit differently.

 

[Secret Chief]

I think I agree.

However, the whole IQ thing kind of changed my life, as well. After it was found out I had a high IQ, I started being treated different academically and at home, which kind of shaped my life and paths a bit differently.

I've added to my post if that's of any interest...

 

[Quintessence]

Metrics like this are an example of the adage "just because you can doesn't mean you should."

We live in a culture that is almost obsessed with putting numbers to things. It reflects our capitalist culture and a drive to commodify things to be bought and sold, assessed in terms of its dollar value or worth on a market. Product is paramount. It reflects our post-enlightenment materialist culture that insists there's only a physical universe and therefore if you can't boil it down to a number it isn't real or isn't important. Science is paramount. It reflects our patriarchal, hierarchical, and competitive-focused systems of social interaction and governance that enjoy ranking things from best to worst, useful to useless. Being number one is paramount.

These perspectives and narratives have their uses. Trouble is, slapping numbers on complex phenomena can become overly reductionistic, overlooking the importance of process, the importance of aesthetic, the importance of community and so on. What even is intelligence? Does it make sense to try and articulate it by slapping a number on it? What questions does it help answer? What is this metric useful for? Why do we want to (or need to) use it?

The questions brought up in this thread in many respects reflect the problems and limitations of trying to stick a number on something that perhaps shouldn't be distilled down to one.

 

[Secret Chief]

Metrics like this are an example of the adage "just because you can doesn't mean you should."

We live in a culture that is almost obsessed with putting numbers to things. It reflects our capitalist culture and a drive to commodify things to be bought and sold, assessed in terms of its dollar value or worth on a market. Product is paramount. It reflects our post-enlightenment materialist culture that insists there's only a physical universe and therefore if you can't boil it down to a number it isn't real or isn't important. Science is paramount. It reflects our patriarchal, hierarchical, and competitive-focused systems of social interaction and governance that enjoy ranking things from best to worst, useful to useless. Being number one is paramount.

These perspectives and narratives have their uses. Trouble is, slapping numbers on complex phenomena can become overly reductionistic, overlooking the importance of process, the importance of aesthetic, the importance of community and so on. What even is intelligence? Does it make sense to try and articulate it by slapping a number on it? What questions does it help answer? What is this metric useful for? Why do we want to (or need to) use it?

The questions brought up in this thread in many respects reflect the problems and limitations of trying to stick a number on something that perhaps shouldn't be distilled down to one.

Yeah, that's what I meant to say

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

eg
- Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences

Interesting stuff.

Honestly, for myself being so good at math and programming and tech, I feel that my English skills are actually a bit weak. I wonder where I'd fall on that chart.

 

[Secret Chief]

Interesting stuff.

Honestly, for myself being so good at math and programming and tech, I feel that my English skills are actually a bit weak. I wonder where I'd fall on that chart.

Well, a random vaguely related thought. I work with a lad (at school) who has serious ADHD. Because of this he'd probably get a minus score on an IQ test. But my professional evaluation of him is that he's got the mind of a wizard.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Well, a random vaguely related thought. I work with a lad who has serious ADHD. Because of this he'd probably get a minus score on an IQ test. But my professional evaluation of him is that he's got the mind of a wizard.

I'm technically considered neurodivergent, and my current IQ is about 160. Sometimes, I come off as having wildly different ideas than RF about some topics. Other times, not so much. I also know how to do things like 3D graphics programming and general programming.

In regards to my IQ, there was a time as a teenager where I believe I scored even higher than that, and rather than making me happy, I feel my strong tests actually led to greater problems.

 

[Secret Chief]

Interesting stuff.

Honestly, for myself being so good at math and programming and tech, I feel that my English skills are actually a bit weak. I wonder where I'd fall on that chart.

You come across to me as very articulate.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I think that sometimes, high IQs, or high IQ scores, can lead to a sort of being "set apart" (or put on high) from normal society. Such a thing can lead to loneliness, and should it happen, one also must be careful not to do things like take up drinking as a part of trying to make sense of things.