Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

IQ

IQ
November 21, 2007, 03:46:10 PM
OK, let's get the cull started. All members state their name and IQ, then promptly disembowel thyself if the number falls under 120.

Blitzkrieg, IQ 135.

Re: IQ
November 21, 2007, 04:03:32 PM
How can you know ? Where do pass those test ?

Re: IQ
November 21, 2007, 04:04:26 PM
7000000000 / 10728 = 652498

Even if every forum member failed to qualify, there are 652498 times as many people remaining in the world to test and cull if needed. This is not helpful.

Re: IQ
November 21, 2007, 04:19:42 PM
I honestly don't think IQ tests are very meaningful. I know plenty of people who seem like they would have high IQs, but make stupid decisions or waste their time on meaningless shit. IQ is more about potential than actual intelligence.

That said, I'd still like to know mine. How did you find out yours? Could you recommend a reliable test (preferably not online)? I've never cared much to take an IQ test, but I've always been sure its higher than my classmates'. All I have is a high SAT score...

Septicemia

Re: IQ
November 21, 2007, 05:07:06 PM
Here's a humorous bit I found on the interwebs -

The IQs of 301 Eminent Geniuses according to Cox (1926) along with their Flynn Effect corrections

"The Intelligence Quotient scores are on the Stanford-Binet scale. The scores listed are based on biographical data (including school rankings, anecdotes, works written, etc.) from data up to 26 years of age (and corrected to counter a regression towards the mean)."

Here's a sample (adult IQs):
Mozart - 165
J.S. Bach - 165
Kant - 175
Descartes - 180
Galileo -185
da Vinci - 185
Spinoza - 175
Wagner - 170
Beethoven - 165
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe - 210
Napoleon - 145
Emerson - 155
Rousseau - 150

And another absurd IQ related link: http://www.megasociety.org/constitution.html

Re: IQ
November 21, 2007, 05:12:06 PM
Haha WOW. 210 Geothe. He's good.

Re: IQ
November 21, 2007, 05:17:56 PM
Quote

Mozart - 165
J.S. Bach - 165
Kant - 175
Descartes - 180
Galileo -185
da Vinci - 185
Spinoza - 175
Wagner - 170
Beethoven - 165
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe - 210
Napoleon - 145
Emerson - 155
Rousseau - 150


Congratulations guys, you all pass.

Re: IQ
November 21, 2007, 05:20:09 PM
Goethe higher than Bach, Kant, Mozart, and da Vinci? What? Why? What a moronic project.

Re: IQ
November 21, 2007, 05:26:36 PM
 ::)

Dunkelheit

Re: IQ
November 21, 2007, 05:30:55 PM
I don't trust those online tests but I took one yesterday and it gave me 139. The tests usually do correlate pretty well to actual intelligence. But they still can't be relied on as a be-all end-all of a person's competency. If I ever got the oppurtunity to take a real one, I'd definitely do it though.

Re: IQ
November 21, 2007, 05:49:22 PM
Quote
I know plenty of people who seem like they would have high IQs, but make stupid decisions or waste their time on meaningless shit.


You're seeing personality type in its momentary context, not "high IQ person doing dumb stuff".

Quote
IQ is more about potential than actual intelligence.


IQ AND personality type allows potential in given areas of life. There are architects, leaders, empaths and so forth, but usually not all in one person.

That's where caste comes in by ordering those 120+ survivors into appropriate roles as fits a personality profile in society. Not all designers are doers and vice versa.

Re: IQ
November 21, 2007, 05:58:50 PM
Quote
Goethe higher than Bach, Kant, Mozart, and da Vinci? What? Why? What a moronic project.


Much of this kind of 'forensic' IQ information is developed from the analysis of written material left behind, so it tends to produce scores that favor people who:

1. Wrote a lot

and

2. Wrote very well

The result is that such methods tend to overestimate the intelligence of professional writers (Goethe) while underestimating the intelligence of people who manifest their genius in non-verbal ways (it also explains, for instance, why Wagner outscores Mozart, Bach and Beethoven - he was a prolific and fairly talented writer, as well as a musician).  

There is certainly value in IQ testing in establishing a ballpark estimate, but reality, as always, is the real test.  For instance, it is obvious that the most intelligent person on this list is, in fact, the one who scored most poorly.  Real genius is measured in accomplishments, and artists are no match for leaders in this respect.

Re: IQ
November 21, 2007, 06:30:29 PM
Quote
IQ is more about potential than actual intelligence.


IQ was never meant to measure applied intelligence; potential and intelligence are essentially synonymous with regard to it.

chrstphrbnntt

Re: IQ
November 21, 2007, 06:47:17 PM
chrstphrbnntt, IQ 147.

Don't take online IQ tests. Set up a proper Stanford-Binet test. I don't know how much it costs, where to take it, et cetera -- I took mine during middle school -- although, I do know that Mensa administers tests. Also, what test you took and when you took it matters; my 147 may be a 132 on a different scale.

Re: IQ
November 21, 2007, 06:49:56 PM
Quote
Goethe higher than Bach, Kant, Mozart, and da Vinci? What? Why? What a moronic project.


Are you familiar with Mozart's history? The man could barely dress himself, leave alone perform simple tasks around the house. Possibly, this list over rates him for all I know. Either he had a high IQ and complete lack of practicality, or low IQ and a musically complex mind. Either way, he does not fall in to the category of "useful" people for the survival of the earth, because let's face it, we can live and achieve greatness without ever having heard his music. In which case, he would stand for "culling" ::) I would agree with the statement that reality is the real test. Good luck testing 7 billion people for how useful they are.