question on intelligence

[Smilingeyes]

not necessarily. think about people who created mathematical systems...there wasn;t specific information on the subject...they had to infer based on certain observations. and also, it's not all about education/crystallized intelligence...people also can solve new problems.

Who are these people? What are these systems? Are you talking about the very first people to create the concept of mathematical abstraction without any knowledge of prior example of other people doing something similar? If so, you are talking about a very small number of people thousands of years ago, people of whom we don't know actually know anything at all. If you are talking about people who currently create advances in mathematical concepts, simply the understanding of other mathematical concepts is rather significant training to that task.

Now on the solving of problems... what is a completely new problem, without any comparable problem in human history. What is a problem that can be successfully solved but has to be solved without any information on the subject? We are beneficiaries of an incomprehensible amount of knowledge, information and ready-to-use solutions

...

Or perhaps you are referring to exceptional individuals such as Srinivasa Ramanujan, who indeed managed to create mathematical contributions with little enough of education... yet such exceptional individuals are exactly that, exceptional. If anything the story should remind us that most of the mathematical contributions to society that we know of are created by individuals who happened to be in a position to have mathematical education, not by the most intelligent or the most talented.

Probabilities are that the world's most intelligent person is a boy born within the last three months born in a small farming community in China and that he is going to live a significantly worse life in every possible way than Dan Quayle.

And yet from another point of view, a large number of scientific advances have been created by pure grinding of numbers and equations, a large number of proofs have been created by simply proving for every possible alternative that they do not work. And from my high school maths classes I remember that often enough the people who did this were quicker than the ones to look for the more abstract, more elegant solution.

Again, if we consider yet another point of view about solving of problems. I claim that the people who are most likely to solve new problems are those who are the most likely to run into problems, that is favour a highly changing environment with which they interact a lot. This suggests that the most prolific problem solver is probably extrovert, sensoric and alpha. Probably solving most problems in an imperfect way but nevertheless solving a huge number of problems each day in one way or another.

*shrug* things not as simple as one might think at first.
For further consideration... Try comparing Andrew Wiles and Jamie Oliver. Which one has been more intelligent? Why?

[Smilingeyes]

Let's not get all into what people are supposed to be saying and get down to the main facts.
1. Studies have show that people with higher IQs over 1 standard deviations have signifigant better chances of finishing college, not going to jail for a felony and many other thing. Now whether these people are happy or not is another matter. FACT
2. Studies have show that people with lower IQs beyond 1 standard deviation have a signifigantly higher chance of going to jail for a felony and dropping out of high school. Maybe they're happy and joyous. FACT
3. There are MBTI studies that show that MBTI results correlate with "giftedness", a group that constituted 15% of the population. This is ~ 1 standard deviation. This group in signifigantly greater amount of Intuitives and Introverts. No preference for thinking or feeling. FACT
4. Just because you're smart doesn't mean you're happy. FACT
5. Be happy. This is the only opinion. OPINION

Goodstuff.

The whole NTs are teh smarter is what you make of the facts. someone has high IQ, then they are a NT.$ FDG certainly has a high IQ, but many people do not think that he is NT and that he is SF, this is not against the facts either.

I'm just having fun with today. Cheerios.

Are you talking socionics NT or MBTI NT in this part?
And in what sense do you mean the part between the dollar signs?

[Minde]

*shrug* things not as simple as one might think at first.

Yep.

[Smilingeyes]

@hkkmr: Well put

[Jarno]

IMO, that is a damn shame and the people who participate in such cruelty on this site should be ashamed of themselves. I'm definitely not the only S, F, or SF type to have experienced this bias on this forum and I'm interested to hear what others have to say.

Totally true.

BTW I would think lead intuitives are better at IQ tests. This however doesn't implies that they are better at observing / studying / teaching etc, which are all different competences needed for dealing with concepts like for example socionics. I guess the bias has started because NT types focus a lot on intelligence. So there would probably also be a bias in SF types for having better social skills. Which isn't always true either. etc etc.

[Jarno]

It doesn't make any sense that an NT would score highest on visual as a rule -- such a task is mostly related, I would think.

That task is not Se in my opinion.

A visual/spatial test usually means twisting and turning pictures in your mind.

I would say intuitives score highest on these because of their imagination.

[MysticSonic]

IQ isn't related to type. Period. I thought this forum itself would've made this clear by now.

[Jarno]

IQ isn't related to type. Period. I thought this forum itself would've made this clear by now.

Isn't this the same faulty comment as saying, working with tools isn't type related.

Or saying becoming a professional boxer isn't type related.

I do think that there are some quality's that certain types have with which they have an advantage on IQ tests. (assuming IQ test is a reliable criteria for measuring intelligence)

Thinking that all types have equal qualities on all different aspects of life (including intelligence) is ignorant.

[MysticSonic]

Isn't this the same faulty comment as saying, working with tools isn't type related.

Or saying becoming a professional boxer isn't type related.

I do think that there are some quality's that certain types have with which they have an advantage on IQ tests. (assuming IQ test is a reliable criteria for measuring intelligence)

Thinking that all types have equal qualities on all different aspects of life (including intelligence) is ignorant.

I agree that not all types possess either the same qualities or skills in all "different aspects of life." Saying otherwise would be an extremely bizarre assertion for someone whom asserts Socionics to be, at least at some level, true. However, throughout my entire time on this forum I have seen, at least to the extent that I can gauge intelligence, no correlation of type and intelligence. As well, although they are inherently faulty and flawed, studies on MBTI types show little to no correlation in IQ to type as well. Whatever MBTI is describing, I feel it is at least similar enough to Socionics to be at least taken into consideration.

As well, let us consider the fact that IQ tests are, theoretically, not supposed to be effected by the amount of practice one has in that area or field of thought. It is supposed to be an objective measure of general intelligence and capacity to learn. A type, whose skills I believe(and obviously this is going to be subjective due to my own understanding of Socionics) in their type come from preference and practice rather than innate ability, for the most part, would not have any effect upon such a measurement. And although the matter how innate and unchangeable IQ truly is is a matter of debate, I believe there is fairly strong evidence to show that IQ is a generally static measure of one's general intelligence(whatever that might mean.) There would undoubtedly be complications in the relations between type and IQ, and they undoubtedly effect each other to some degree, but the matter itself I believe is a topic I believe to be generally irrelevant to Socionics in terms of its significance and has no reason for being brought upon from any practical point of view.

[Robot]

let me further explain myself- thank you niffy for making this a new thread, i truly appreciate it.

i sometimes wonder how others react to me and my posts if they would react to me the same way if i were not a SEE. not only that, but you can even see this NT intelligence bias in the high number of people claiming to be NT types, or really even N types or T types on this forum. Yes, these people are the ones who would be the most attracted to and interested in socionics, but i find it hard to believe that 100% of these people are accurately typed (especially all the ILIs). Thus showing that some of these people may want to be a certain type or want people here to perceive them as a certain way. Furthermore, I've had SEVERAL experiences on this site (i guess this is to be expected with all the T people around) with T people saying hurtful, disrespectful, unneccessary, and unjustified things towards me and others with a complete disregard for how others may feel. As far as I am concerned, this is ridiculous. IMO, this forum is for people at all stages of understanding socionics to discuss their observations, insights, experiences, whatever. As a feeling type, I can definitely see other feelers not participating as much in the forum because of people's rudeness. IMO, that is a damn shame and the people who participate in such cruelty on this site should be ashamed of themselves. I'm definitely not the only S, F, or SF type to have experienced this bias on this forum and I'm interested to hear what others have to say.

I will continue to fight this injustice against all the S, F, and SF people out there until we have equal rights!

Do you or do you not believe that SFs are less intelligent?...

SEI- They need to get a brain.

[malkavian]

I don't think that it is big difference in socionic types IQ... Major part of people have average inteligence, even if they are NTs.