Well I suppose if I have to think in circles, I would prefer them to be thready intertwined circles that don't necessarily always take the same path, but interconnect and strengthen the common understanding of the whole. That doesn't always happen though...
You will come across a lot of circles here, its part of finding the correct path no matter how high your IQ is.
Take what I say with a grain of salt, because that's all it is compared to the ocean of complexity when it comes to actions and real life.
Or maybe of even solidifying the correct path, building upon it. I wouldn't say that I have an overly high IQ, I have met people who I would consider naturally smarter/quicker than me. Generally though, while I do not know a bunch of things, what I do know and am interested in I can be very good at. One year I found my statistics class extremely interesting and I set the curve on every single test because I was literally just that enthralled with the subject, but the year before in calculus I averaged near 40%s on every test because I barely bothered to open the book. While some seem naturally inclined to learn a bit about everything, others might want to learn everything about a bit. I would say both are fairly equal measures of intelligence.
I really don't see the point in knowing your IQ number. Do people really want to quantify their unfulfilled potential? And if you're an idiot, it's best to be a blissful idiot. The best result you could hope for is dead average.
I know my IQ but it doesn't mean anything to me beyond what it is ... my performance on a test some person made. Smart comes in some many shapes and forms. I genuinely do not think u can tell what someone's IQ is based off type (which I don't believe in btw) or even how they come across. If u actually look even the "dumbest" people to u r really, really smart so its better to focus on the stuff that makes one feel we r all equals. If u r too concerned about ur own ego, u only process things through a narrow slit of cliches ... and that's incredibly dumb.
"My comrades and my beloved, upon your way you shall meet men with hoofs; give them your wings. And men with horns; give them wreaths of laurel. And men with claws; give them petals for fingers. And men with forked tongues; give them honey words." --Kahlil Gibran, The Garden of The Prophet
When I was 13 or 14 I had to take an IQ test at my high school. I remember one question where all I was supposed to do was draw a straight line, emphasis on straight, but my hand shook because I have an illness and was on about 10 different trial and error medications with interesting side effects. I still haven't figured out how this question was relevant, or what it was supposed to mean about my intelligence.
i was in chess club in 7th grade. buncha useless, arrogant tools except this one kid who insisted on not playing the game but rather pretending the pieces were action figures and tossing them at each other, all while making little "pew pew" and explosion noises. it was worth joining the club to watch this. let's see fisher or kasparov win with those rules.
i'd be that kid, i don't have an interest in chess. and pretending them action figures sounds way more exciting than prove i can capture your king before you capture mine or is it queen? i dunno
They deal with the same material, but differently.
Of course. But it's very difficult to believe that they're virtually neck-and-neck. One is known for catharses and the other for picking pieces apart and drawing patterns. Very, very oversimplified, naturally. (But we have at least a few billion-page threads devoted to defining Ni in the first place.)
That doesn't mean that they couldn't still arrive at pretty much exactly the same answers, but the odds seem ungodly slim. I can't prove that it's not true, but.. damn, it seems that the stars would have to align so closely together that our calipers would say "fuck it" and walk out of the room.
This isn't a knock on the two types that score the best, or that there are types that score higher than others, or what have you. It's more of a knock on how any two completely different approaches can yield results that are consistently so damn close.
J. Scott Crothers
Founder, Truthtology, est. 1952
Prophet and Channel, God Almighty
Author, the Holy scripture Elevenetics
"Just as jet fuel cannot melt steel beams, so too cannot the unshakeable pillars of Truthtology ever be shaken, whether by man, nature, or evidence."