1) LII/ILE
2) ILI
3) LIE
4) IEI
5) EIE
6) EII
7) IEE
8) LSI
9) SLE
No idea how to rank the bottom 6.
Rank the types in terms of IQ
1) LII/ILE
2) ILI
3) LIE
4) IEI
5) EIE
6) EII
7) IEE
8) LSI
9) SLE
No idea how to rank the bottom 6.
Last edited by suedehead; 02-16-2016 at 04:02 AM.
As an ILE, I approve of this listing.
It would be dependent upon the people you know of the types. Most EII I know IRL are average or slow, while my I.Q. is higher than anyone I would regularly encounter. If TIM is type of processor, I would consider I.Q. to be the speed.
Today general IQ tests seem to be easier for T-N types. Other types should get high scores in less quantity, have no idea how much less.
IQ tests are very easy to learn. Especially if you are a programmer and have studied mathematics extensively. It's pretty much impossible to come up with a test that cannot be learned, or in which you cannot use existing learning.
I do agree ILE's and LII:s probably do best in the standardized IQ tests. However, I don't think these types are any smarter than others.
There is more variety of intelligence than 16 types.
Every female that has ever tested as ESTJ for me admits they are not smart, and they definitely aren't. Maybe it's because a primary purpose of basically proceduralizing everything is typically evidence of not being able to do things on a case by case basis, which translates to being poor at anything new. Really, no ST's consider themselves smart, outside of very surface-level coverup statements. Just an FYI from my experiences.Originally Posted by suedehead
I should also throw in that most INTJs by self-testing are slow but think they are sharp. Very few are actually intelligent.
I don't like the processor speed analogy. Sounds like Intel with the old Pentiums.
lowest: Suedehead
This would make some sense if it related to the types of questions in an actual IQ test, but otherwise type has nothing to do with intelligence, IMO.
Water's wet? News flash: most people who aren't White/Ashkenazi, East Asian or upper-caste Indian are screwed IQ-wise. My ancestors probably had a penchant for inbreeding which has a detrimental effect on IQ also.
Last edited by suedehead; 02-16-2016 at 06:34 PM.
You can have brilliant NTs and dumb NTs, brilliant NFs and dumb NFs, brilliant STs and dumb STs, and brilliant SFs and dumb SFs.
Obvious fact is obvious: IQ is ntr.
"In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is." - Yogi Berra
Yes, but I have yet to see an SF who is brilliant at standardized testing, which is what an IQ test basically is. I think Ti and Ni has an edge in this narrow method of determining intelligence.
IEE ranked above beta STs?1) LII/ILE
2) ILI
3) LIE
4) IEI
5) EIE
6) EII
7) IEE
8) LSI
9) SLE
Beta STs have better common sense, but I'd imagine IEE's would be more adept at abstract pattern recognition on average.
The type of intelligence that IQ measures is pretty all-encompassing. I wouldn't put street smarts, emotional intelligence, and bodily-kinesthetic intelligence on the same level as g.
It would be Ne and Ti. Generation of possible cases going into logic of the specific ordering that creates such. All visual/spatial awareness is Si, though.
That's not low. That's average.
For I.Q. to become apparent, there must be a comparison. Without myself in a group, I.Q. usually has no bearing on anything, because everyone present is generally fairly close. That said, I can usually tell what sort of I.Q. people have, and relate it to how people/work dynamics are affected by such. E.g., LSI moderate intelligence, but better for concrete task solutions than above average I.Q. IEE, so people mistake their "I.Q."s/"intelligence" most of the time.
Fixed that for you.
they are all retarded
good bye
imo standardized testing is easy...almost all tests can be "learned".
real-time analysis and adaptive situations are hard.
Eh, that's a cop out. Someone taking a timed IQ test without prior explicit practice would be using real-time analytical reasoning. IQ is a measure of how quickly you arrive at the right answer spontaneously. A lower IQ person who reads an answer sheet after taking the test might be able to understand the logic behind the correct answer in retrospect, but it would've taken him a longer than average amount of time to arrive at the answer on his own, if at all.
Last edited by suedehead; 02-16-2016 at 11:52 PM.
I don't understand why you're so obsessed with the IQ test. It's a test in abstract logical reasoning, which would obviously tend to favor NT types. Nevertheless, there are stupid ILEs and highly intelligent ESIs. All types have different strengths that may or may not be rewarded by a standardized IQ test.
I wouldn't have a problem with the test being called an "abstract logical reasoning test," because that's the only thing that it measures.
Well, if an ESI, weak in Ne-Ti scores highly on an abstract logical reasoning test, wouldn't his Fi-Se be far beyond any measure of NT's?
If I.Q. tests are Ne, and we assign a 1-10 value to it based upon I.Q., and each function of higher dimensionality is consequently ranked one point higher than the previous one, then an ESI of 5-Ne would have 6-Ti, 7-Se, and 8-Fi, for a total Mental superblock intelligence of 26. If an ILE of 7-Ne (higher I.Q.) thus had 6-Ti, 5-Se, 4-Fi, then his total Mental superblock intelligence would be 22, 4 less than the ESI of 2 less I.Q.
Well, people who score well on IQ tests typically go on to procure 6-figure salaries, so IQ-related skills are probably more useful in the real world than other skills.
This whole 'everyone is intelligent in their way' notion is tired cliche by the way. I have a low IQ and have absolutely no strengths to speak of. I'm intellectually inept, physically inept, emotionally inept, socially inept, etc. Whatever strengths I do have aren't on par with those of a high IQ person's, nor are they as extensive.
Last edited by suedehead; 02-17-2016 at 01:58 AM.
The fact that you keep saying it, tells me you haven't fully accepted it as fact yet.
Tbh, from my personal observations and others I've known, it seems like people of lower I.Q. can't really perceive I.Q. very well, outside of being able to tell if someone is mentally handicapped.
Well, I can't really speak to what you are saying, but to me it's very clear that suede doesn't have a low IQ. It's more likely that he doesn't have any concrete evidence showing that he has a high IQ and is stagnating due to his current circumstances and inability to change them. Being Ne polr i imagine this is particularly nagging for him.
I will also say that I think when you are in a toxic or stagnant environment, it's easy to feel stupid, hence why i think his current circumstances play into this (apart from the fact that he has mentioned them in past posts).
Last edited by Contra; 02-17-2016 at 04:59 AM.
That would be goofy, since it's easy to go take an I.Q. test lol. Overall intelligence may be average or higher, but I get the impression that he can't turn his Ne into any series of concrete planning, which is a failure between Ne and Ti.
Well, sure, but there are other means by which you can assess your intelligence, though, not super reliably. Even worse though, I'm pretty sure he is just using pure observation and introspection, which is definitely not an accurate way to estimate your IQ. You may be right on the Ne-Ti point.
I'd just find internet versions and use the various quizzes and such. E.g., the empathy one, spatial awareness one, etc. Although, he is most likely subconsciously purposefully failing those, because he thinks he is ugly, which equals stupid/worthless (to him at least).
Eek. honestly I'd stay away from anything but the WAIS or stanford-binet. I don't trust the internet tests at all. I mean, sure, take them for fun, but don't rely on them as serious assessments.
It's better than him just magically guessing that he's slow lol.
You have pretty limited experiences then.
Nope, though I would be inclined to agree that I don't typically go places that high I.Q. LSE women would be. In general, though, LSE has Routine as their Base, which is generally the opposite of what is considered intelligence (separate from knowledge).
i misinterpreted as how SF's do on standardized tests in general
You are completely mistaken about this. People who "procure 6-figure salaries" are people with a lot of common sense, a good grasp of where to place themselves spatially, how to make themselves irreplaceable to a company/organization.
You're both incorrect.
People who have 6-figure salaries are those who want 6-figure salaries, know the steps to achieve such, and work to achieve such. Oh, and drug dealers.
FWIW, @suedehead, I scored in the 99th percentile on my IQ tests both as a preschooler and in high school. I have never (yet?) come close to earning a 6-figure salary. Imo, @maithili amd @Jeremy8419 are correct (though I don't see how Jeremy's original description of ppl who earn 6-figure salaries excludes drug dealers so that they should be listed seperately)
Also, I know at least one high-IQ LSE. She's a doctor, and she really is pretty brilliant.
Again I'll say it: intelligence is not type-related.
"In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is." - Yogi Berra
I can tell that I'm stupid because of the fact that I have to strain myself to read half the posts on this forum, as well as the myopic and pathetically nihilistic nature of my thought processes. If I had a higher IQ, I'd have a vivid mental life, some semblance of dignity, and a clearer sense of direction and purpose. You guys are just easily impressed by my middle school-level vocabulary. An overly pronounced Ne-polr in the form of low openness to experience is probably a sign of low IQ btw.
Last edited by suedehead; 02-18-2016 at 09:10 PM.
You're aware this could not be type related, correct? There's multiple things that could give the impression of "low I.Q." without actually being low I.Q. The ASD quiz threads are an example.
That's my bias. I don't consider law-breaking to be an achievement
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote