Do smart people have high IQ?

[hjgbujhghg]

Do you think, that smartness necessarily correlate with high IQ score? Or is it more just a combination of curiosity, openness, social skills and learned knowledge? Do you think that people who are curious, or more open minded than average necessarily have to have high IQ?

 

[Swivelinglight]

Or is it more just a combination of curiosity, openness, social skills and learned knowledge? Do you think that people who are curious, or more open minded than average necessarily have to have high IQ?

I think they're independent of eachother. IIRC the higher your intelligence the higher the chance of having certain disorders. Many disorders, such as depression, cause the lack of openness, curiosity, social skills, and the ability to learn. Likewise, having those traits doesn't necessarily mean that a person is intelligent.

 

[Qlip]

Hmmmm... it seems to me that IQ is a sword wielded. The sharper it is, the more effectively it can be used to prove not only that True is True, but also that True is Untrue. The first is an intelligent thing to do, the latter is not.. depending on the circumstances. There are definitely situations where it is most intelligent to prove that True is Untrue.

So, I guess you could say that intelligence is knowing how to use your IQ, which isn't necessarily your IQ itself. So, I think intelligence is more of having an accurate understanding and prioritizing of the things that are relevant to your success. IQ most certainly does not measure this.

 

[93JC]

A smart person may do well on IQ tests, but a high IQ does not necessarily entail being smart. The only thing an IQ test measures is how well a person can complete an IQ test.

 

[indra]

I know a guy that has really poor problem solving skills. I don't like giving explicit direction, I'm more of a "lead a horse to water" type of person - and he very often can't figure how to drink.

But something about him, I find intelligent. I don't have the capacity right now to explain what it is. Maybe, he's just tenacious. He has a can-do attitude, like me.

 

[Glint]

There doesn't seem to be a universally accepted definition of what constitutes 'intelligence.'
The most I can do is approach the topic in a very roundabout way...

IQ VS. Intuition | Bryan Helmig
This is a fairly old post. Ignore the point the post is trying to make about intuition (I'll return to it in a moment) and focus on the 'IQ test question' examples provided.

[Situation 1] It is technically possible to answer all three questions correctly without the use of 'intelligence' if one reads the questions very carefully, translates them into logical formulas and then works through them mechanically. For example, the formula for the first question is x+(1+x) = 1.10, where x is the price of the ball. This is not an exercise in intelligence, and could arguably be learned to an extent (one of the criticisms of IQ testing). 'Intuition' is completely excluded from this process.

The post (and the study it refers to) paints intuition in a pretty poor light. However, consider a scenario in which someone reads the ball question and 'intuitively' conclude that the answer is 10 cents.
Why is it that most(?) people are content to write down the (incorrect) answer and move on to the next question [Situation 2], whereas others will have the gut feeling of 'wait a minute... this isn't right!' and re-read the question, possibly transitioning over to the mechanical method to determine the answer. [Situation 3]

Situation 1 and situation 3 may both result in a correct answer.
but is situation 3 not also an exercise in 'intuition'?


The difference between the way intuition manifests in situation 2 vs situation 3, is what I think intelligence is, and its use isn't limited to hypothetical test questions.
Think of the times when you know something is right or wrong (or missing something crucial) before you actually work through it rationally. And when you do, it turns out that your first feeling was correct.


(One of the) problems with IQ tests is that at the end, what it measures is whether you got the questions right -- not whether you exercised intelligence to do so.
Learned knowledge (situation 1) can provide you with the correct answers but it is not the same as intelligence.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Theory of multiple intelligences - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[PocketFullOf]

Not necessarily, but the smarter someone is the more likely they are to have a high IQ.

 

[baccheion]

They usually do. The ones that don't are probably not good at taking tests or are smart because of a high EQ. The problem with IQ tests isn't their accuracy, but how misused they are and maybe how narrow what's tested is.

 

[Chthonic]

I'm not even certain there are various levels of intelligence anyway, just people with different focuses. The fact that modern society values only certain uses for intelligence does not mean that there is a standard for it. Everyone has within them the capacity for reasoning, creativity, literacy, etc. whether or not they choose to develop it is another matter.

 

[Andy]

At best, IQ only measures a small range of the many forms intelligence can take. I've never yet seen an IQ question that read "It's late and you really need to buy something, but the cashier would rather close up and go home. What do you say to get them to serve you instead?"

 

[prplchknz]

At best, IQ only measures a small range of the many forms intelligence can take. I've never yet seen an IQ question that read "It's late and you really need to buy something, but the cashier would rather close up and go home. What do you say to get them to serve you instead?"

Hmmm I'd ask if they had anything ready right away, but more than likely a cone of soft serve since all that requires it taking a cone and pulling the lever. unless they're in the middle of cleaning the machine. then I'd probably see if there was like a bag of chips or something, but if I was gonna do that why wouldn't i just go to the mini mart? (I'm assuming fast food here) so yeah the first thing.

Honestly realistically I would just go some place else.

 

[Andy]

Hmmm I'd ask if they had anything ready right away, but more than likely a cone of soft serve since all that requires it taking a cone and pulling the lever. unless they're in the middle of cleaning the machine. then I'd probably see if there was like a bag of chips or something, but if I was gonna do that why wouldn't i just go to the mini mart? (I'm assuming fast food here) so yeah the first thing.

Ah, diplomacy. A little of what you want for a little of what I want. The less of an impossion your request, the more likely it is to be acted upon.

 

[prplchknz]

Ah, diplomacy. A little of what you want for a little of what I want. The less of an impossion your request, the more likely it is to be acted upon.

yeah plus I have a self imposed rule to try not to be a dick unnecessarily, it works quite well.

 

[Poki]

Do you think, that smartness necessarily correlate with high IQ score? Or is it more just a combination of curiosity, openness, social skills and learned knowledge? Do you think that people who are curious, or more open minded than average necessarily have to have high IQ?

No. Smart is a combination of effort and IQ. If IQ is low you can make up for it with effort. I know someone who has a professionally tested IQ in the 70s, but I wouldnt call him stupid at all. He is fairly smart, it just takes him longer to figure things out. I have also seen people who have extremely high IQs that I wouldnt think are smart because they dont know how to really use it except on useless crap. IQ more determines how fast you can pick up and learn things, but it still requires effort and direction to make you smart.

 

[Poki]

At best, IQ only measures a small range of the many forms intelligence can take. I've never yet seen an IQ question that read "It's late and you really need to buy something, but the cashier would rather close up and go home. What do you say to get them to serve you instead?"

thats to open ended and dependent on the person, mood etc. and has alot of different right/wrong answers that also get into degrees of right/wrong. I am sure every personality type would respond differently based on what they value. Its like these IQ tests where they show you peoples faces, they screw me up big time because the faces shift right in front of my eyes, like those pictures where depending on where/what you focus on things it creates a different picture. People and faces do that to me. Like I can see multiple sides of things. Really screws me up on those tests and I dont know what they are looking for.

What I mean degrees of right wrong. you can be nice or you can bitch and threaten. Both get you what you want, values dictate degree of right wrong to the point where even if the person accomplished it others will still deny due to path the person went..

 

[baccheion]

I'm not even certain there are various levels of intelligence anyway, just people with different focuses. The fact that modern society values only certain uses for intelligence does not mean that there is a standard for it. Everyone has within them the capacity for reasoning, creativity, literacy, etc. whether or not they choose to develop it is another matter.

There are definitely varying levels of intelligence, and it's easy to tell. However, IQ can be too narrow a measure of such intelligence, and can be made more important than it really is, misinterpreted, or misused.

No. Smart is a combination of effort and IQ. If IQ is low you can make up for it with effort. I know someone who has a professionally tested IQ in the 70s, but I wouldnt call him stupid at all. He is fairly smart, it just takes him longer to figure things out. I have also seen people who have extremely high IQs that I wouldnt think are smart because they dont know how to really use it except on useless crap. IQ more determines how fast you can pick up and learn things, but it still requires effort and direction to make you smart.

I agree that effort is a part of learning and success in life, but I think this is being repeated to the point that the significance of effort is being overestimated. The problem with intelligence being wasted is usually from no effort whatsoever (did they even waste their intelligence, or did they not do with it what someone else thought appropriate, therefore leading them to being accused of wasting their life) or from being screwed due to others feeling inferior (getting fired or pushed out of a job because you're "too good" and are thus a threat), and infinite effort, from what I've seen, isn't enough to overcome the lack of it.

I suppose there are things some learn slower than others, or pick up more easily, but past that if the intelligence in that area is lacking, then after a lot of effort there isn't really much improvement, just someone who has put in a lot of effort. Also, I notice that people who succeed due to effort and perseverance usually cheated, benefit from those better than them getting screwed over, and succeed not by getting better but by others seeing them as putting a lot of effort into what they are doing (someone tried really hard, so they should be awarded for doing that). Also, when they stick with something for a long time, eventually, everyone is gone and they are the only ones left. They may not have improved that much, they've just succeeded by default.

 

[Poki]

There are definitely varying levels of intelligence, and it's easy to tell. However, IQ can be too narrow a measure of such intelligence, and can be made more important than it really is, misinterpreted, or misused.


I agree that effort is a part of learning and success in life, but I think this is being repeated to the point that the significance of effort is being overestimated. The problem with intelligence being wasted is usually from no effort whatsoever (did they even waste their intelligence, or did they not do with it what someone else thought appropriate, therefore leading them to being accused of wasting their life) or from being screwed due to others feeling inferior (getting fired or pushed out of a job because you're "too good" and are thus a threat), and infinite effort, from what I've seen, isn't enough to overcome the lack of it.

I suppose there are things some learn slower than others, or pick up more easily, but past that if the intelligence in that area is lacking, then after a lot of effort there isn't really much improvement, just someone who has put in a lot of effort. Also, I notice that people who succeed due to effort and perseverance usually cheated, benefit from those better than them getting screwed over, and succeed not by getting better but by others seeing them as putting a lot of effort into what they are doing (someone tried really hard, so they should be awarded for doing that). Also, when they stick with something for a long time, eventually, everyone is gone and they are the only ones left. They may not have improved that much, they've just succeeded by default.

Effort can be things like school, etc. The issue with school is that they teach a certain way and not always toward how the child learns. So lets take old school style like an aprentice where its one on one and the master can better gear the teaching toward the person.

Someone with a high IQ does have an advantage, but I wouldnt go so far as to say someone with a really low IQ cannot be as smart and in some instances smarter then someone with a higher IQ.

 

[baccheion]

Effort can be things like school, etc. The issue with school is that they teach a certain way and not always toward how the child learns. So lets take old school style like an aprentice where its one on one and the master can better gear the teaching toward the person.

Someone with a high IQ does have an advantage, but I wouldnt go so far as to say someone with a really low IQ cannot be as smart and in some instances smarter then someone with a higher IQ.

Someone that can't dance probably won't be better at dancing than someone with natural dancing ability, even with infinite effort. However, if someone who can naturally dance does nothing with their ability, then they'll go nowhere and if the one that can't dance works the system, puts in the effort, looks the part, and doesn't give up, then eventually they may go somewhere in the field of dancing. It's not that the person that can't dance is better, it's that there was more to succeeding than knowing how to dance and they leaned on those other things. The same can be said if someone had naturally dancing ability and wasted none of it, but then went nowhere. They had the ability, but lacked opportunity, got pushed out for being too good, or weren't as good at dealing with BS.

What do you mean by smart? I think anyone can be well-read and experienced at what they are doing, thus making them not stupid at it and seemingly better than someone with a stronger natural ability that hasn't been at it very long, but I don't think someone with a lower IQ can necessarily be smarter than someone with a higher IQ (in that form of intelligence).

 

[Flâneuse]

I think if someone does very well on an IQ test, they probably have a decent amount of innate mental ability, but that doesn't necessarily mean they actually use it. I also think it's possible to be very intuitive, wise, and complex-minded, but not have the surface mental skills/sharpness necessary (strong working memory, processing speed, etc.) to get a very high IQ score, especially on the performance/non-verbal section. I've read that non-verbal IQ (which supposedly correlates with fluid intelligence) decreases after a certain age (I think mid-twenties), but I definitely wouldn't say that people get less intelligent as they get older.

Overall, I think depth of understanding and wisdom are what really matters, and IQ (which is probably an iffy way to test aptitude anyway) doesn't determine whether or not someone possesses those things. Obviously, some people just have a lower intellectual ceiling and, even with hard work, couldn't obtain the same level of understanding that a hard-working genius is capable of. However, a person with moderate aptitude but a lot of curiosity and determination is probably going to obtain a higher level of understanding in something than a naturally sharper person who has no interest in learning about it.