User Tag List

First 3442434445465494 Last

Results 431 to 440 of 1059

  1. #431
    Aquaria mrcockburn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    3w4 sp/so


    Quote Originally Posted by LunaLuminosity View Post
    Meh, I see this a whole lot more often then not. It is so common for me to hear the "My IQ is *insert ridiculously huge number* but I'm still a no-good, worthless..." that it makes me want to explode.
    It leads me to think of a few likely things about the person:
    1.) The person takes the "Intelligence Quotient" too seriously in the first place and looks at a statement like "my IQ is 159" as "I am better at everything than 99.9999% of the population" and feels the need to counter this with "OMG I have weaknesses too!"
    2.) The person has terribly low self-esteem and is using the opportunity as an excuse to beat him/herself up.

    Bottom-line, having a high IQ is awesome, but so is being able to play piano or climb a mountain. You don't have to give it more power than it has.
    I think a lot of people (myself included) follow the disclosure of their (high) IQ score and then follow with a seemingly self-deprecating downplaying statement in an attempt to echo your "bottom line" - that IQ is not the end-all be-all. It's not a condescending condolence to all the "mere mortals" (i.e., "Don't feel bad, I may be smarter than you, but I'm still a human just like you!"

    I don't want to give IQ scores too much power, and I don't want people to mistakenly get the idea that I do. (In my opinion, if anyone believed that their own high IQ score made them all-superior humans, they'd fail to comprehend the limits of IQ testing and/or the scope of non-testable/unrelated achievements/attributes - thus immediately 'disproving' their notion of superiority. )

    Plus, nobody wants to appear arrogant. I have my own theories on why this is so, but that's another thread.

    You'll understand one day...when your Fe begins to sprout like the HPV warts you've always dreaded.
    3w4-9w1-?w6 (nearly headless nick)
    Lawful Evil



  2. #432
    Junior Member VictorClimacus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010


    I assume there is only a small correlation--and probably not statistically significant--between MBTI type and IQ, and a much smaller one between type and intelligence. We are too quick to assume that there is a difference in brainpower between two individuals, since our judgments are usually based on their behavior in the presence of us and/or others, as well as on their ability to express their ideas or demonstrate logical reasoning in a social environment. There is an endless range of external variables to consider here, which makes an evaluation of raw brain power difficult to ascertain.

    NTs often get undo credit for being smarter than the other types. Or, rather, I think that their personalities are too often blamed on, or confused with, their intellects. Like all Ts, they are especially adept at efficiently using their brainpower supply. And, unlike the sensors, they've got an affinity for abstract thinking. But this doesn't mean they've got more brainpower; it just means that, if paired with another personality type of equal intelligence, the NT is more likely to appear smart, which I think could apply to both a real-life situation and an IQ test. SO, the argument could be made that, as far as who can "best demonstrate their intelligence", the NTs win, followed by STs/NFs and SFs, who are most likely to be viewed as dumber than they really are.

    NFs are also good at appearing smarter than they really are. They get labeled as the "deep, philosophical" ones when in reality it's just their personality talking, not necessarily their intelligence (although in many cases, of course, it is a combination of the two).

    So, in essence, Ns get too much credit, or are a little better at looking smart than the Ss. This may extend to IQ tests, probably to the same extent that introversion is positively correlated with IQ. But I think those findings are worth bunk.

  3. #433
    The Memes Justify the End EcK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    ILE None


    I assume there is only a small correlation--and probably not statistically significant--between MBTI type and IQ, and a much smaller one between type and intelligence.
    about your first statement I'm not saying you're wrong (yes I am) but you're using baseless statements while studies actually show the exact opposite.
    There's a statistically significant correlation between mbti type and iq, especially if you look at S/N. Now statistics are what they are, they don't speak for any individual but express trends in populations.
    nts are, as a group , actually smarter in terms of IQ, but the difference between S and N is way more significant.
    One reserve I'd have is that the mbti tests (and the nature of the subject) are not standardized enough to get a strict application of the scientific method.

    Now I'd have to agree more about the intelligence part of your statement, in its broad sense.
    I'm the first person to consider that a skill isn't anything to boast about if it's not balanced. I don't consider the cliché 'stupid party boy' to be any more interesting than the cliché 'socially akward nerd', they both think they're cool when they just suck ass in human terms, having no true adaptability.

    One thing I agree with absolutely though is that preference is not proficiency. It's no feat to get say, a T preference if it's just because of F-tardation just as much as there's a huge difference between being "philosophically selfish" and just being too narrow minded to see the big picture. You can of course replace selfish by selfless in that statement.
    Expression of the post modern paradox : "For the love of god, religions are so full of shit"

    Theory is always superseded by Fact...
    ... In theory.

    “I’d hate to die twice. It’s so boring.”
    Richard Feynman's last recorded words

    "Great is the human who has not lost his childlike heart."
    Mencius (Meng-Tse), 4th century BCE

  4. #434


    Quote Originally Posted by InsatiableCuriosity View Post
    I did hear an interesting story when talking to a psychologist about a young gifted boy in late primary school whose parents were called in when he tested sub 80. When they asked to look at the test he had skipped one section of the questions completely. The young lad was called into the office and asked why he skipped the questions to which he replied something to the effect of "they already asked those questions earlier and I didn't think I should have to answer them again". The questions were indeed similar but rephrased to test consistency in answer and this ten year old called the test into question!!
    Lol. I hated that about tests because once I answer a question I forget about it. Then it comes up 1-2 times later and I get stuck between trying to remember what I wrote last time and having to redo it (blah!). What I want to know is why laziness is considered to be a sign of intelligence.

    Quote Originally Posted by tawanda View Post
    IQ testing was originally meant to test children to see if they were 'smart enough' to be able to go through certain levels of classes, usually general ones, or if they weren't.
    Aha. I've always thought IQ tests were a poor measure of raw intelligence because performance depends too much on recall of rote information and use of trained skills such as math and vocabulary use. Makes much more sense now.

  5. #435

    Default Smartest Types

    I'm sure this has been discussed before, but what types do you think or better yet, have you noticed have been smarter than others?

    I have noticed that the INTP's I have talked to, are extremely well read, beat the pants off me in Chess and provide very deep conversations.

    And just guessing, I would think that NT's in general would be the smartest since they can think logically without much feeling and at the same time be able to see the big picture and not what is right in front of them.

    But at the same time, if NT's truly are smarter, does that necessarily mean that SF's are at the low end of intelligence spectrum?

  6. #436



  7. #437



  8. #438


    In my opinion, intelligence has everything to do with how one flows with their environment. NTs are notoriously good at detached analysis, but it is one thing to think of smart things and another to be smart.

  9. #439


    Quote Originally Posted by Blown Ghost View Post
    In my opinion, intelligence has everything to do with how one flows with their environment. NTs are notoriously good at detached analysis, but it is one thing to think of smart things and another to be smart.
    arent ENTPs good at both, street smart...

    i always admired street smarts the most, but in intelligent people.. that's why i dig ENTPs

  10. #440
    Nips away your dignity Fluffywolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    9 sp/sx


    IQ tests favor intuitive people, especially IQ tests with time limits on answering.

    IQ is a crappy way to measure intelligence.

    There is also no better way to measure intelligence.

    Basicly, measuring intelligence between different people is futile.

    Hey, wasn't this a seperate thread? IQ/Intelligence doesn't quite equal being 'smart'.

    I define smart people by the way they dress and the way they subtly intertwine with other people like a flowing river meddling with other peoples affairs without getting burnt. They need a certain level of intelligence. But I'd say intelligent people are the ones that work their capacity to their fullest in respectable ways.
    ~Self-depricating Megalomaniacal Superwolf

Quick Reply Quick Reply

  • :hi:
  • :bye:
  • :)
  • :smile:
  • :wubbie:
  • :D
  • :hug:
  • :happy2:
  • :newwink:
  • :wink:
  • ;)
  • :cry:
  • :(
  • :doh:
  • :mad:
  • :dry:
  • :mellow:
  • :unsure:
  • :huh:
  • :shock:

Similar Threads

  1. Determining Socionics type from MBTI type
    By Azseroffs in forum Socionics
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-05-2012, 09:28 AM
  2. Do you identify more with your MBTI type or your Enneagram type?
    By Zarathustra in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 151
    Last Post: 06-28-2012, 05:32 PM
  3. [E4] enneagram type 4 what mbti type matches up?
    By liYA in forum Enneatypes
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-21-2011, 04:01 PM
  4. figuring out my socionics type from MBTI type
    By psyche in forum Socionics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-16-2010, 10:50 PM
  5. Your MBTI type and your Socionics type
    By 527468 in forum Socionics
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 11-28-2008, 04:03 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO