question on intelligence

[strrrng]

this wonderful bit of completely unsourced and ridiculous speculation earns you a long sought-after spot on my ignore list.

for the first part of my statement, how about you name me 5 historical geniuses who had a preference for sensing.

for the second part, did you read the article hhkkmr posted?

and for the sake of it, name all the "really smart" people you know, then compare that with their type.

I don't give a fuck whether I'm on your ignore list or not, so feel special putting me on...

[Minde]

There are different types of intelligences, I believe...

In some situations I feel like I can more than hold my own in the smarts department, in others I feel like a completely incompetent moron.


EDIT: I think I just pretty much said what BLauritson did.

[Creepy-pokeball]

There are different types of intelligences, I believe...

In some situations I feel like I can more than hold my own in the smarts department, in others I feel like a completely incompetent moron.


EDIT: I think I just pretty much said what BLauritson did.

This is what I always have felt. However, I do find G-Factor really intriguing. But I do wonder if there is above and beyond G-Factor alone? We, as a global society, are at such youthful stages of social and or cognitive science, I believe.

[strrrng]

yeah, salawa, those online ones are mediocre at best....I've never taken a real one, but my old therapist told me what was on it and demonstrated some stuff. there are four categories: verbal, spatial, processing speed and short-term memory. basically, visual is like the blocks and drawing pictures, i.e. attention to detail....processing speed deals with matrices and symbol-coding, short-term memory is where they say #'s, letters or both, in any order and you have to repeat them back....and then verbal is like metaphors and conceptual reasoning and vocab.

I would not be surprised at all if an ESTj scored higher on memory than an INTj....I think the visual fields are where NT's would score best, NF's might score higher on verbal....

In 'Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance', the author, Robert Pirsig, mentioned his IQ of 170 dismissively, saying the test was just analytic manipulation.

[Ezra]

I'd say that most people on this forum are open-minded enough to recognise that each type is valuable in their own way. However, I think that in wider society, there is definitely a bias in the clever people being NTs (nerds). NT stands for something else - Nerdic Thinker.

Salawa, just out of interest, which game is your picture from? It looks like C&C or Rise and Fall or something.

[strrrng]

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.

Which is not to say that an individual NT won't, but rather I wouldn't make that prediction based only on sociotype.

One moment, I'll find my test report so I can make a better comment.

ahh, this is what I hoped you would notice. I would conjecture that S's would be better at the visual portion that deals with attention to detail and quick scanning...however, the block are about abstract patterns, seeing the whole....so intuiters would theoretically be better at that (I suck at scanning shit, but can synthesize shapes and stuff like that easily).

you took a real test? cool. please share

[FDG]

It's just not true. There are dumb NTs with typical NT interests but that don't understand things particularly well or easily, and the opposite is true for SFs.

[strrrng]

It's just not true. There are dumb NTs with typical NT interests but that don't understand things particularly well or easily, and the opposite is true for SFs.

very true, just uncommon.

[Mediator Kam]

I'd say that most people on this forum are open-minded enough to recognise that each type is valuable in their own way. However, I think that in wider society, there is definitely a bias in the clever people being NTs (nerds). NT stands for something else - Nerdic Thinker.

I've met many NT's who compete in sports and succeed, such as soccer and swimming. Like my father, I could never describe him as a nerd. Well maybe, he doesn't care how he dresses.

[strrrng]

And SAT scores have a pretty good correlation with IQ scores so I used it as proxy (turns out these 20 people i spoke about all have wide and varied interests bla bla, none of them is your typical guy that has to study 3423545 hours to get an high score. You'll see that this is generally the case for the tail of the distro)

yeah, I agree. if you take an IQ test, then take an SAT, the results will be similar. but these days, peoples' final scores on their SAT's are higher than their actual abilities, unless they're one of the really smart people who takes it once and does really well.

[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.