Thread deleted sorry, ooops. May post later :thumbsup: Thanks :)
Printable View
Thread deleted sorry, ooops. May post later :thumbsup: Thanks :)
Probably pretty high.
Average but over 100. Maybe 110-120.
Somewhere between - ∞ and ∞.
I would like to see an IQ test without NT bias
I think or I have heard that actual cognitive tests measure things such as repetition of movements.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallmo
I can say that I'm visually quite restricted. I had to record my physics experiments on video in order to determine results but I have serious visual problems which are not related to visual acuity. I think those tests won't be fair. It is insanely easy to make me very dizzy in my head with right tricks.
12 give or take a few points :3c
Just an enormous as my penis
My IQ range is called:
https://media1.tenor.com/images/e530...itemid=5248867
Now it makes sense, I remember the reflective glasses joke :frustrated:Quote:
Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007
Must be small when you can't even get the sentence right.Quote:
Originally Posted by FDG
https://media1.tenor.com/images/8451...itemid=6201328
I see, I see...Quote:
Originally Posted by FDG
https://i.imgur.com/cCQmHgb.png
I would like to meet a stupid LII "mastermind". I am sure they exist because iq varies within the same type.
Mastuh mind iq computing events unimaginable for all yall little garbage people
They exist, you'll never know it because of how intellectual they are in their centers of interest though. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallmo
I never took a real IQ test so no clue. Plenty of fake IQ tests online though to falsely boost your ego.
Probably in the 99th percentile (I tried Raven's SPM once). By the way, IQ is just meaningless.
So, a normal distribution... Well, not that "normal"... :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007
so your IQ is enough to assume the existence of negative IQ numbersQuote:
Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007
I remember an mbti meme involving a picture of 3 men: two bulked up guys with bodybuilder physiques and one scrawny guy with very little muscle standing between the other two. The caption read: "when you're an INTP with average IQ"Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallmo
I guess my IQ is not high enough for this joke. So the other guys are also INTP but with higher IQ?. But they are all 3 INTP? Or is the skinny guy INTP and the other 2 some sensors. Ok, I get it, they are all 3 INTP and the thing about muscle is a metaphor for intelligence. Or something..?Quote:
Originally Posted by Toynbee
Yes, it is a normal distribution which means that it's tails will never cross the x-axis and therefore it is normed in a way that integration limits go from - ∞ to ∞.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Normal_distribution
There might be people with negative IQ numbers with a probability of 10 to the power of negative Graham's number. :lol:
If you get that joke, your IQ is probably well above average.
Yes, I think the meme was supposed to be playing on the idea or the stereotype of those types having high IQs and it might act as a metaphor or analogy for how one with an average IQ might feel in the presence of those with higher IQs. Muscles being analogous to intelligence, in the case of this meme.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallmo
Don't sell yourself short. IQ is an overrated metric.
IQ is calculated as non-negative number only. You usage of the statistical model is wrong here, what I've pointed above.Quote:
Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007
another one. N types are such N types...Quote:
Originally Posted by WinnieW
> If you get that joke, your IQ is probably well above average.
but his T seems to be so so, anyway
P.S. my IQ was 110-115 by Amthauer test
My IQ is -273,15
Setting average IQ as 100 is illogical itself. I think IQ should only give percentile. That 100 is there for traditional reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol
I don't get how one contradiction sets you off but you are able to look past other contradictions (set by your position) when you settle your mind. I don't get it. Sorry, but you are such an F.
:rofl:
https://i.imgur.com/gJumxKA.jpg
Well, ability to see qualities that generate parallel paths might lead you to wrong paths...Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallmo
Negative IQ is interesting
Would it mean that you make other people more stupid? Being an IQ sink.
Really? I guess your problem is that you don't understand the meaning of 10 to the power of negative Graham's number.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol
I'll explain it to you if you want.
All you have to do is to set the average IQ level to zero, and then all people with lower IQ has negative values as result.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallmo
It's a matter of definition of the reference number. The number 100 can be considered as an offset value.
btw. I never participated at an official IQ test, but I took an unofficial one and achieved 138 as result.
Oh hello, Graham? I'm interested what it's about.Quote:
Originally Posted by WinnieW
I'm a genius, i promise!! I'm just a late bloomer... Heh, heh...
If we define zero IQ as having no intelligence at all. Literally dumb as a rock. What would then negative IQ mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by WinnieW
If you define zero IQ = no IQ at all then negative values are meaningless, but thats a different definition.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallmo
It's much like the definition of a temperature scale. Set 0 and 100 as numbers for observable temperatures that make sense to people in reality,
e.g. freezing point and boiling point of water, then you get the Celcius temperature scale.
Yes, it's a number used by a mathematician named Graham. It's a sooooo unbelieable huge number, it blows every imagination.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chae
10 to the power of negative Graham's number is a number soo unimaginable tiny... it's not zero, but in reality it can be regarded as zero.
Classical NT style of humor...
It 'overclocks' and you become a genius
Destruction of the intelligence of other's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallmo
anti-IQ, like anti-matter. XD
Your problem is that you don't take into account how IQ is calculated and that you can't understand it with the 1st time when I've said this above.Quote:
Originally Posted by WinnieW
Maybe Feelers have negative IQ.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Strange
The way how IQ is calculated is a shared definition. Without such a definition called standard a comparisson of results would be impossible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol
Therefore such a standard makes sense.
But it's a choice making the number 100 the average IQ value; the test would also work with number 1000 as average value.
No, they don't. But there is also EQ, the value of emotional intelligence. I guess feeler score better in such tests.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallmo
No reason to feel devalued, F-types have strengths in other areas of daily life.
There are also areas in life I'm not that good at.
3.35988
So tell me how it is calculated every single time even when tests fail to take into account such a dismal/high number and we have to invent a new test for it as it takes a very weird test that handles the tail portion of it which are symmetrical in both ends.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol
I think it takes a person with lots of IQ.
In fact there are people who design IQ tests for absolute geniuses (who are not one). It gets very difficult to get test subjects even if they accomplish the task and since it is so hard it due to limited number of people it also means that could give false results. One way to get grasp of this is to make a simulation. Let's say you make a computer program that "throws" few dices few billion times. Well, the result distribution won't be "perfect" although it is very very near. I have made one. It was quite fun.
It's important what variant of the test you used.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas
Also in IQ testing the difference up to 10 units is often thought as not meaningful due to inaccuracy of tests and not perfect conditions (you may be tired, etc). For example, making the same test after a year you may get this difference. Up to 120 IQ is same "normal" category. Not in general IQ, but in particular scales you may to have more significant difference - like being T type to do better math tasks than average F type.
Te thing IQ measures is very artificial. If you do let's say height distribution then you need to put notion that (human) length > 0. As IQ is just some sort of random convention it can capture all the real numbers.
There are other kinds of distributions like log normal distribution where left side of tail will end at 0 (and the curve is not symmetric around it's peak). Is IQ is truly normally distributed? Well, apparently, I'd say that statistical tools do not capture mechanism and are therefore just tools for approximation. Statement about IQ artificiality applies. It is just measures something where so called experts tend to agree with each other.
138 give or take 5
I feel like this has already been a thread for some reason.
hurdur im smart hurdur
What's up with all the IQ threads? They are springing everywhere like mushrooms after a warm summer.
I volunteered on a reaserch study for my friend, so these were my results
Ravens Advanced Progressive Matricies- 33/36 (Grade 1)
WAIS-lV: 141 IQ, my fluid and crystallized reasoning were very high, while my working memory was slightly above average.
I don't think that IQ test are biased at all. IQ measures your fluid reasoning, crystallized intelligence, and your working memory. I happen to think that its the other way around, NT's are more predisposed to developing these skills at younger age, while other types develop different types of skills, such as socializing. Its not only NT's though, there are plenty of ENFp, INFj, ISTj, and ISTp that have high IQ's so its not only type specific.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallmo
I took a bunch of professional tests when I was 16, scored between 135/140, and there were many word play questions I remember. Then internet came out and I've tried new tests and in them my IQ sucked, all qs were in english so I excused myself thinking that I didnt understand well...
Tests may to have different scales for different ages. Human brain develops after 16 years. So you could get other number later.Quote:
Originally Posted by ooo
> all qs were in english so I excused myself thinking that I didnt understand well...
it's important to test on your native language or with close language level
Not enough people bragging.
Someone once said that I wasn't aware of how smart I was, and then someone else jumped in and said, No. He is exactly aware of how smart he is. It was a pretty sick burn.
Online Iq tests were 135-140, so I'd say probably 120 ish. I'm terrible with spacial reasoning fwiw.
Some people take the onlinetest and say: I bet they make it easier to make people pay for the real test. People who make bad results say: I was tired. People who make the real test are rare and people who do not take it say those who take the real test have low iq for taking it coz its a scam. Some people try to impose their ideal self as high iq. Some people downplay the phenomenon of IQ. Some people just say IQ is not important, it is all about EQ. Its just a mess this IQ thing.
How is your chess playing skills?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pookie
I'm not spatially good being exact. My mind works with fuzzy forms. I scored medium in some spatial tests while some sections give above average and other sections are below average.
2D stuff is usually easy while 3D stuff is much much worse (I'm stereo blind – I can't see in 3D using both eyes) but I managed to get average in 3D test.
Was 135 in high school then over 150 per professionally certified book tests after I enhanced my math skills.
I only got tested professionally once when I was a little kid, they only gave percentiles in different areas and determined I was gifted. My parents never told me about the results (as far as I recall). I found the test ten years later and found I got 99.8th percentile in spatial visualization (or something like that) and 98th percentile in reasoning, which would be 146 and 133~ converted to IQ. I scored pretty bad in everything else though. I found a few sites with (relatively reliable) IQ tests for those who think theirs is 120+ (since traditional IQ tests are really bad at measuring outside of the 80-120 range). https://iqhaven.com/ has free tests and seems decent enough, although the site got revamped and it looks like crap now. I did the Mathematricius test which is math-only (https://iqhaven.com/matematricius-test) and scored 145. I think IQ tests are pretty bad though. If I hadn't gone through my Math and Algebra classes in university I would've probably scored much less.
Hmmm, this is pretty interesting. I also think training your math/verbal skills can get you (significantly) better scores in IQ tests, which is another reason why they're not so meaningful. There's also a big statistical discrepancy in small score differences: Consider someone of IQ 125, and someone of IQ 130, given a normal distribution with median 100 and SD 15. For every 10 people with 130 IQ you have 25 with 125 IQ, and yet the difference between one score and the other is usually just a few different questions answered correctly.Quote:
Originally Posted by vesstheastralsilky
IQ stands for Intelligence Quotient (though largely a misnomer now), and it's supposed to measure something that is relatively unchanged over the course of one's life. Then why is it possible for people to get (greatly) varying scores? That means that the method of measuring isn't good enough, or that it's measuring something other than intelligence, or that intelligence actually does change with time.
In my opinion, IQ only gives you a rough measure of people's intelligence (as the ability to recognize patterns, solve novel problems, etc.) and a decent measure of mathematical ability, verbal ability, spatial ability, etc. Since these things are correlated with intelligence, someone who scores high in these factors (compared to other people) will likely be more intelligent than the median, but you can't "stack them up" with others in a normal distribution and say with certainty that they're smarter than XX.X% of the population, which is exactly what IQ tests do.
.. why you keep getting mistyped as SLIQuote:
Originally Posted by silke
that's an external sensory perception - not an internal one, though I get what you're sayingQuote:
Originally Posted by sbbds
in other news that's just a manifestation of the sp instinct - http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...on-SP-instinct
:3
parts of super ego manifests strong in this one.
Tests traditionally written by a psychometrician are a legitimate leveraging gauge at measuring one's intellectual capacities because they benchmark the mean average score for the majority at 100 and then normalize the distribution curve. It measures ability to think accurately and solve problems more than a Te/Si only style of reciting back memorized information. I hadn't realized how many free poser tests had become prevalent and written by non-psychometricians had flooded the internet and begun discrediting the profession accordingly until coming to this forum and seeing a few pejorative views (without merit).Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Timmy
One can research and find the average IQ score by country. If I recall correctly Singapore was the highest at 107 as the average and the USA average has dropped from 100 to 98. President George Bush Jr.'s was only 100 when he tested. I remember that news hitting the radio when he was elected to office. Trump's is very high (and this statement doesn't mean I endorse him 100% because of his strong Ti).
According to wikipedia there is no trusted or official data about his IQ. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by vesstheastralsilky
> Trump's is very high (and this statement doesn't mean I endorse him 100% because of his strong Ti)
he's EIE. the same clown which rules more by TV picture than really
No SLE.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol
As for Wikipedia, how convenient for one in power. I'm sure the radio report I heard was quickly trashed. After all, billions of dollars were about to be spent and lives lost under this man's authority and personal judgment.
I remember a 120 somewhere, don't know what test or the age I took it. It was at school though.
idk 130+ though probably
I like Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences
I was tested by a child psychologist and told that I am gifted.
Attachment 14815
115
Haven't been administered a full battery, but based on the tests I have taken I would assume somewhere in the top 1%.
Spatial abstraction/logic/problem solving is hard for me to do, so i'd assume not very high.
I only know what my parents told me about the IQ test I took as a really little kid, which is a high number but both of them are highly prone to exaggeration and I'm certain my IQ is lower than it was when I was a kid. My estimation of my own intelligence is probably slightly above average. I saw my brothers official result of 140 and he's a little quicker than I am but we communicate easily.
132
60
When I was 11 years old, my school principal called in the Stanford-Binet people to give me an IQ test. They asked me a bunch of questions, like, what if you need to move stuff across a river in a boat? It took all afternoon, and they said my IQ was "high 140's", which I take to be about 147. This didn't get me any better treatment from my mother, as far as I could tell, so it was pretty irrelevant to me.
Since IQ and age are inversely related, I'd estimate my present IQ at about 17, which is still larger than my shoe size.
After following a link, posted to a server today, I ended up on this article.
If the IQ test forced upon you was under 130, like mine, or you only have a rough estimate from the average of your online tests you can now take heart in these findings. You may be smarter than you, or others, think.
20 Scientifically-Proven Signs You're Smarter Than AverageQuote:
You use recreational drugs
https://static.businessinsider.com/i...020000-750.jpgPsychology Today
According to Psychology Today, people who use more drugs are more intelligent. "Intelligent people don't always do the right thing," they write, "only the evolutionarily novel thing."
According to a study conducted by National Child Development, "more intelligent children in the United Kingdom are more likely to grow up to consume psychoactive drugs than less intelligent children." These drugs include marijuana, cocaine, heroin, alcohol and tobacco.
The chart on the left shows the findings of the study. It depicts the latent factor for the consumption of 13 different kinds of psychoactive drugs, (cannabis, ecstasy, amphetamines, LSD, amyl nitrate, magic mushrooms, cocaine, temazepan, semeron, ketamine, crack, heroin, and methadone). There is a clear association between childhood general intelligence and adult drug consumption.
"Very bright individuals (with IQs above 125) are roughly three-tenths of a standard deviation more likely to consume psychoactive drugs than very dull individuals," says Psychology Today. They ran the same study in the U.S. and found similar results.
14/20 Not too bad. I don't want my brain volume measured just yet. I will look to dna and my MRI scan for a rough estimate. :shifty:
Please remember that although some have high IQ they may still be LQ in other areas. Yep I totally stole than from a former forum member.
I think I am in the 120-130 range, but I'm probably overestimating.
2
Never took an IQ test, but I did get a nearly perfect score on the SAT.
Also, I once did a memory span test for a psychology experiment where they say longer and longer sequences of numbers, and you have to repeat them backwards. The examiner said I was the first person to get a perfect score.
Anyways, IQ is overrated.
IQ points are just cocoanuts for the monkeys!
Completely agreed. The last IQ test I took I got a perfect score on (indicating ~150+), and I had taken a similar test years before having got one question wrong. You can actually get better at those kinds of tests without necessarily becoming appreciably more "intelligent" in reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by thehotelambush
Nassim Taleb posted an (IMO) insightful criticism of IQ not long ago, showing it to be flawed from a mathematical and complex systems perspective:
https://medium.com/incerto/iq-is-lar...e-f131c101ba39
Quote:
Background : “IQ” is a stale test meant to measure mental capacity but in fact mostly measures extreme unintelligence (learning difficulties), as well as, to a lesser extent, a form of intelligence, stripped of 2nd order effects. It is via negativa not via positiva. Designed for learning disabilities, and given that it is not too needed there (see argument further down), it ends up selecting for exam-takers, paper shufflers, obedient IYIs (intellectuals yet idiots), ill adapted for “real life”. The concept is poorly thought out mathematically (a severe flaw in correlation under fat tails, fails to properly deal with dimensionality, treats the mind as an instrument not a complex system)...
I think Socionics could go a ways towards advancing a more precise, flexible and useful concept of mental capacity.
Yes!! IQ tests are highly biased towards logic and intuition, they don't address ethics at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Varlawend
I have tried dozens of IQ tests and literally hundreds of 'IQ-like' puzzles. I have also studied the concept thoroughly. Therefore, what do IQ tests really measure? Mainly, they are simple tests of deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning and general knowledge across a number of domains. What then is missing?
From the tests I have taken, the following are usually missing:
Short-term memory: you have just studied a chapter of calculus. Do you: 1) have to look back at the chapter to remember the formulae, or 2) is that information stored in memory and at your fingertips? If 2) is true, you have an advantage over the people who answered 'yes' to 1). Yet this is missing from most tests.
Concentration: when you work at a task: do you laser-in on the task and focus for hours or does your attention drift? If you can laser-in, you have a big advantage intellectually over those who cannot.
Working memory: child prodigies at mathematics, chess, and music often have high levels of this. When you are doing a math problem, can you hold seven bits of information in your mind at once or eleven? The more information you can hold in your mind, the better you can solve the problem. A professional mathematician or chess player could probably think dozens of 'moves' ahead. However, this is sometimes missing from IQ tests.
Creativity: Can you look at a problem in new and unexpected ways? Can you generate dozens of ideas? Again, this is often missing.
Anyway, like I said, IQ tests are just generally tests of inductive reasoning, deductive reasoning, and general knowledge. Do not look at them as fatally flawed but as imperfect. Nonetheless, there is much empirical support for the professional ones that are developed and normed properly. Please keep all of this in mind...
309
10 inches
At least 9000 probably
...
2137
85. Almost perfect score (out of 100). :king:
1 sd below the mean, unfortunately.
The title is literally “What is your IQ?”. The first post was edited and doesn’t really say anything. Are you op?Quote:
Originally Posted by jason_m
Whoops... I confused my post at the top of the page with me creating the thread... You were right. My mistake... ('Why did I name it that?" ran through my head. That explains that.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Poptart
Happens to the best of us lol :)Quote:
Originally Posted by jason_m
114
Wow, I'm so blazing and catastrophe ornamented with dressing on the E=mc2 pocket monster of ultra high unlimited Mewtwo IQ!!*
I got tested once in Middle school which I scored 120. Although I generally think there are other factors such as hardwork(or what I prefer efficiently working) and responsibility that are more important than IQ when it comes to success.
I’m probably dumb. whatever. If I take an IQ test and do bad, I’ll feel bad about myself. If I do good, I’ll think it was just a scam :p
anyway, people are good at different things. Different forms of intelligence and all that. That’s what I tell myself when I do bad on these things :lol:
Yeah IQ doesn't mean much unless you're in the extremes honestly. Many other factors that play into who you are and how well you can utilize your life.Quote:
Originally Posted by aster
i must have posted this before i was tested to see if i was capable of returning to work after the car accident. my dr. required it before sending the permission slip to my boss. i have no compunction about saying thats its almost certainly decreased because i don't attach an important emotional value to it. i will not report the number but i will say that it is very average, a little on the higher side of that, but not significantly. or at least it was over a year ago. my brain has done a little healing since then, but not in the double digit iq range lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by ashlesha
It does seem like there are a lot of really smart people on this site! When I’m trying to convince people of the usefulness and validity of socionics I say to them..but everyone’s so smart on the forum lol. Although sometimes I do feel like the forum could do with some more average person outlooks? (Not that I like to refer to any human as average tbh). Some more every day wisdom..wish I could be that person but my wisdom is not all that either :p Wisdom is something I would like to develop in myself..anyone can develop wisdom I guess.
I definitely used to be smarter before I developed mental health problems aged 16 and my life quality vastly reduced for next 15 years. I wasn’t exceptionally smart or anything but I got some of the best grades out of the kids in quite a decent school at age 16. (A good state school, in the UK that means a non-fee paying, normal
school). Definitely not smart now, although like everyone I have my rare moments I suppose. I think a few things could help me re-wire my brain a little and make me feel smarter. I need a more challenging and appropriate job role, I need a partner who I can be myself around and who brings out my interesting side. I need to read a wide variety of non-fiction texts. Also, I joined a writing group recently..it’s very casual but it feels very right :)
One of the realizations I've come to develop about life is that virtually everyone is fairly stupid; the brightest among us are people who manage competence in one or two areas.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bethany
I'm curious; can you describe why the outlooks here don't seem "everyday" or relevant to the "average person?" The only difference I really see is that people here are a little more thoughtful than the average, and so their takes are just a little more well-structured and elaborated while the average person doesn't even have a very coherent outlook to begin with.
Why do you think a partner would help you?
@FreelancePoliceman Hmm well I might be wrong. I do really like this place- people are open and thoughtful and kind. I’m sure there have been many pearls of wisdom that I’ve learnt from.
Maybe I am expecting too much. It might just be the internet forum nature of the place- people holding back a bit and also using the space to work through their thoughts. I feel like in real life I might give slightly better advice to people? Maybe not however lol. Not that I necessarily give advice on here.
Also I worry that typology can make people a bit depressed. People can get too in their heads and forget about the real world. It’s why the random thought thread is so popular- there’s quite a natural feel to that thread although the balance of the other more structured threads is good too lol.
Eventually, I want to tell some of my ‘sensible’ friends or colleagues about typology and see what they think. I just think that it’s important to keep one foot in the real world and listen to those more general voices..if that makes sense.
A partner?
Well, I miss having someone I can have long rambly conversations with (I’ve had this with ‘best’ friends in the past who I clearly had some sort of good communication with, even if they couldn’t help me with problems because of bad ITR.) The thing I miss is being listened to and feeling understood- on a literal level. A free-flowing conversation. I think with a good partner there will be an element of that, not too much but not too little. Stimulating conversation which opens up pathways in your brain and also gives you a release because you feel in sync with another mind, which I think validates your sense of self because someone else is following the patterns of your thoughts.
whenever someone says someone is really smart I wonder just why they think they are smart. Because I seriously think that almost always, maybe always, when people excel at one thing, they are usually not as smart in another. Socionics kind of gets at this, too. so really I think the question is what are you smart at and what are you dumb at? Usually when people claim others are smart it’s because they agree with them or are smarter/more knowledgeable in something they want to be smarter in. so what I’m saying is I think everyone is smart and dumb in their own way :)