User Tag List

First 7151617181927 Last

Results 161 to 170 of 444

  1. #161
    Senior Member Lex Talionis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    382

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lily flower View Post
    Children with high IQ's very frequently have serious social skills issues. It's just hard for them to relate to children their own age. I don't know if it gets better when you are adult or not.
    I wouldn't necessarily go so far as to assert that it is high IQ which results in alienation, but rather introversion. It seems to me that most of those individuals reported as being exceptionally gifted are introverts by nature.
    "Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily."
    —Bonaparte

  2. #162
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    Btw, I was kinda the smartest in back in my primary school days (between 5 and 10), at least according to a test they ran on the whole cohort of same-age children (they only gave a ranking, not a result, plus it wasn't exactly an IQ test). I do remember feeling a bit disconnected from those kids who grew up to be bullies and drug dealers by the age of 14, but by the time I was in high school it wasn't really that bad anymore, especially since I learnt that girls responded to me just fine when I didn't use excessively eloquent wordings.

    I wouldn't necessarily go so far as to assert that it is high IQ which results in alienation, but rather introversion. It seems to me that most of those individuals reported as being exceptionally gifted are introverts by nature.
    Well, then it's impossible to distinguish where the causation lies. Anyway, the Sidis guy seems extraverted to me.
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  3. #163
    Senior Member Lex Talionis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    382

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Well, then it's impossible to distinguish where the causation lies.
    Your logic doesn't follow from my premise.

    Anyway, the Sidis guy seems extraverted to me.
    Upon what do you base this conclusion?
    "Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily."
    —Bonaparte

  4. #164
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    My simple logic:

    suppose someone is socially isolated. Either he is socially isolated because he's really smart, or because he is introverted. Yet, given that introverts have ceteris paribus a higher tendency to be socially isolated, then for an external observer it's impossible to say if social isolation is due to introversion or "excessive" intelligence.

    Upon what do you base this conclusion?
    an impression, just like yours when you state:

    It seems to me that most of those individuals reported as being exceptionally gifted are introverts by nature.
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  5. #165
    Energizer Bunny Resonance's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    740

    Default

    it doesn't matter what the causation is. "Most supergeniuses are introverts" doesn't have to be a causal statement, regardless of whether it's true or not.
    The beauty of a living thing is not the atoms that go into it, but the way those atoms are put together. ~ rCoxI ~ INfj ~ 5w6 so/sp

  6. #166
    / nonsequitur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    512 sp/so
    Posts
    1,825

    Default

    There's smart, and then there's genius. I wouldn't claim to be genius-level (I've always known people smarter than myself), but I'm reasonably smart, by IQ testing or otherwise.

    While I'd like to claim that intelligence makes no difference in my interactions with people, this is simply not true. Consciously or otherwise, my mind can classify people into various groups that engage different parts of my brain and require different amounts of energy.

    With my academic colleagues who are also reasonably smart, it requires almost no effort to converse. We have similar vocabularies, similar senses of humour, I usually assume that they get my references (which happens most of the time) and I get theirs. There are definitely individuals who are much smarter than me, and when I talk to them I try to keep the conversations fresh by using my dry, observational humour to amuse. That said, there are colleagues at the PhD level who come across more like the next group.

    With "ordinary" people whom I'd meet off the street (average university graduate), I don't usually require myself to be fully engaged. It's like running my engine on 2nd gear, if you'd like. These people also seldom surprise me. It doesn't mean that I'm not interested, it's just that most points of view discussed and attitudes are ones that I've already evaluated and analysed years ago. Their views are usually shallow, don't really engage reality and seem to be expressed for the sake of self-expression. I don't allow this group to see the "other levels" and references that the group above has access to, because then our differences are emphasized and they either feel like I'm showing off or putting them down.

    With people who don't have any interest in current affairs, didn't go to university, and work in media/fashion/blue-collar jobs, I hardly ever have a chance to meet them, much less talk in depth with them. Those whom I have met are people whom I have no common topics with. Once the usual topics regarding family, finances, housing, food and travel are exhausted, it feels like I'm pulling teeth. Though I think that this has less to do with intelligence and more to do with the fact that I have very academic interests.

  7. #167
    Senior Member Sanctus Iacobus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lex Talionis View Post
    Troll post.

    Do you expect me to believe this ostensible life story of yours? Your rambling is barely coherent, and yet you are supposed to represent some figure with latent genius? Yes, only on the internet, pal.

    You strike me more as a struggling teenager with a slightly above average intelligence and far too much time on your hands.
    Are you saying my post is a troll post or yours? Sorry I'm not sure if this is parody humor or what.

    I did not make up a life story if that's what you're saying. Hypothetically, if it weren't true, I wouldn't gain anything by impressing people I don't know and will never meet so I don't know what inspires your suspicion.

    http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/5350/unled2a.gif

  8. #168
    Senior Member Lex Talionis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    382

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jwn86 View Post
    Are you saying my post is a troll post or yours? Sorry I'm not sure if this is parody humor or what.

    I did not make up a life story if that's what you're saying. Hypothetically, if it weren't true, I wouldn't gain anything by impressing people I don't know and will never meet so I don't know what inspires your suspicion.

    http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/5350/unled2a.gif
    Your motivation is unimportant. Amusement is motivation enough for most trolls.

    In any case, what is your recorded IQ? What test(s)? How did you manage to acquire an engineering job at such an age and with no credentials? Which field of engineering?
    "Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily."
    —Bonaparte

  9. #169
    Senior Member Sanctus Iacobus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnyboy View Post
    The difficulty of a thing isn't always a product of limited physical or intellectual ability, but limited motivation and desire. A person can be presented with the task of killing his own child, a task which mechanically isn't a particularly difficult one; however, the emotional hurdles might be near insurmountable. As I understand it, communication issues arise because there are fundamental differences between the two parties as a result of divergent intellects: different communication styles, depths of understanding, interests, etc. These differences make interaction less rewarding, and as a result less desirable.
    You make a very good point but there is a reason why I don't believe any person of high intelligence [who does not suffer from a dysfunction] would lack a reasonable ability to communicate and here is why:

    As you correctly point out, it is not a matter of ability but motivation. However, and I am speaking from personal observation, there is plenty of motivation for a person to communicate enough to develop the skills. Children cry when they need food or sleep, for instance, and this is a form of communication.

    What you are saying, I believe (and I'm only nit-picking because you say are no stranger to this thing, which by your own logic means you're motivated to consider this and therefore I hope this isn't irritating) is that the motivation to communicate to achieve emotional connection is lower due to differences in what that connection requires (as the two people experience life differently)... in other words, the challenge that arise outweigh the desire to communicate in order to connect emotionally with another person. Although, this is not really that remarkable, it's something I see most people exhibit when they go through the line at the supermarket.

    This I agree is true, however I think by the age where I was wanting a deeper emotional relationship with other people, I already had effective communicative ability built from [unavoidable] needs and my motivation to get them.

    What did and can happen, though, is that beyond this, a person of high intelligence (and I am being unspecific... I ought to say an aptitude for logical inference) may find their interests are different and so talk less and less to people besides meeting their basic needs. With time, their ability to connect emotionally with other people can diminish, which I believe is why a lot of these people develop eccentricities, live as shut-ins, hermits, or what not. Possibly because of this and certainly because they develop a greater engrossment with their interests, their intellect will continue to develop in this aptitude which is the very reason to your question, I think, about the qualitative associations with high IQ are made in the first place... this aptitude by nature segregates those who have it, either as a consequence or possibly even by means of seeking an environment that supports it.

    I am simply challenging the notion that this is unavoidable. You have a brain that can solve complex problems, relationships and human emotions are complex and problematic... where's the excuse? Einstein was a womanizer (not that I consider that healthy). Such a person is oh-so-smart, meanwhile "lesser" minds strive ambitiously to communicate with other "lesser" minds, if you oh-so-smart then I do not have a lot of sympathy for you because you do not try. Of course I know this because I am guilty of it, which is why I like to challenge this notion... I've personally experienced a better life because I have tried harder and have found it is not hard at all to communicate with people of all types... in fact I even found that there are many different types of aptitude and my attitude of superiority was totally unfounded, which is I guess my point.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnyboy View Post
    I am a bit at odds with the sentiments expressed in these paragraphs. You mention that you can tell a person with a high IQ from those with especially ambitious minds (who you say also score well on IQ tests), and go on to assert that whatever is one of those individuals with a high IQ (which I assume is analogous to genius, since if it weren't, she would simply be a bright person who is unambitious -- *per your distinction between the high IQ and the ambitious mind). It isn't that I disagree with the statement; from what I've seen, whatever appears to be relatively intelligent. However, I must inquire as to your reasons behind your assessment, and the apparent overconfidence with which you present such judgments.
    I suspected this would be debatable because it's not factual by any means, but I have found it to be consistent. I suppose what I am saying is, there is a marked difference between actively being and expressing. I point out whatever because although she does not express her intelligence, I do see a lot of evidence of it.

    To understand what I mean, I'd apply what you were previously saying about the difference between a desire/motivation and an ability. The more you experience the difference, the more you are able to recognize who has an actual ability and who has a desire, and more often than not those who have the actual ability do not have much, if any, motivation to express it.

    That is why I consider whatever to be especially intelligent and someone like SolitaryWalker to be of average intelligence, but especially ambitious. Personally I find the latter more admirable, and I don't say that contemptuously. One person inherits a fortune, another works hard and earns it... who is more virtuous?


    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnyboy View Post
    I wonder if you could elaborate on these 'walls' that other people face. I recall in my youth believing that I understood the truth behind things, while others seemed incapable of escaping the confines of their own ignorance. However, as I have matured I've found that it is often easy to see the walls which surround others, but even easier to be oblivious to those which surround ourselves. Is this sentiment not simply a product of youth?
    Could be... but in my experience it is not a matter of seeing "through walls" but going through them. Does that make sense? In other words, the whole concept is irrelevant except as a way to express one person's willingness to challenge the status quo vs. another's fear to. Call it creativity. I know this answer is probably not very good but my sentiments here are that if you can see boundaries and fences merely as matters of human inhibition rather than actual obstacles, you'll find going through them easier than those who who are inclined to see only see them as difficulties. In other words, a lot of what people think is difficult or hard to do is entirely a state of mind. People only complain when they fail, you won't hear from all those who successfully overcame the obstacles you may face because they're already on to bigger and better.

    And I do have my own walls. I put them there because living totally without reference leads to a life of irreverence, and an almost animal-like existence, which is not a worldview that is friendly to those who I've shared it with.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnyboy View Post
    I liken the search for meaning in life to running from emptiness. Those individuals who are spiritually replete are content to fit nicely into the framework of society. For those of us who aren't so lucky, we spend our lives running through the ethereal halls of our intellects, opening doors until we find the room which contains that 'truth' which satiates our hunger. The irony, however, is that there isn't an absolute truth (at least one that the human intellect is capable of comprehending). However, there is 'your truth', and so long as you feel content in that truth, then I wish you well.

    Some of the greatest geniuses of recorded history have died without ever feeling that contentment.
    It is not running from emptiness, but running from the truth about ourselves when we try over and over to fill the emptiness and fail. If you think about it, this describes most of what most people live for... either trying different things to fill the emptiness, or trying the same thing over and over because it's only temporary, and really all it amounts to is a way to avoid being bored before we die. You're born, you desire to fill the void of your soul, so you just start putting things there and this is what shapes most people's life choices. Then, you die.

    Just as there is a difference between those who express satisfaction in life and those who have it, I was not so quick to rule out spiritual fulfillment like my friends. I've found that those are actually smart enough to accept that they don't have an answer to fill the emptiness and turn to God usually find what they're looking for. It is to accept the paradox that there is only one truth, but it is outside of me, God is true and only through belief and agreement with God will I have truth. This has a lot more to do with the heart, pride, ego, etc. than with intelligence, though. Sometimes the most intelligent people are also the most prone to the inability to accept such a notion (speaking from personal experience again! )

    It's interesting, though, because now I desire an emptiness of what so many people strive their whole lives to fill, so that I could be filled with the presence of God when I find myself worshiping Him. Nothing else is quite so satisfying. I once heard a pastor say "Jesus is more satisfying than the best sex." I was like... but when I experienced it I have actually come to agree, there's nothing as good, and that's because that is how we are created to be... not filled with longing for dead things, but longing for the one and only living God.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnyboy View Post
    I would be interested to know more about how you acquired a remarkably high paying engineering job without any formal schooling (unless you graduated college at 19). I do not by any means disbelieve; I'm simply curious about how you got your foot in the door. How extensive were your studies? Subjects? What type of engineering? Which business? Project examples? If you didn't go to college, why not? Did you graduate high school at a young age? Basically, I'd like to know more about your education (both formal and self study), since a unique educational path seems common among genius.
    My education was not remarkable. I was not private schooled. I got straight As but did not skip grades or anything like that. The only thing different about my education was that I didn't really have to study. I just paid attention during the daily lesson and could recall everything for the tests but this I don't think is remarkable considering grade school is pretty easy. I did attend college classes for my senior year and the same sort of thing... not a lot of effort on my part.

    I don't have a college degree. The "trick" if you will was the method in which I was hired. In the hiring of most people, a company takes a risk on the person which is offset by their assumed ability and performance indicated by a resume and interview. In the engineering field, though, there is some guarantee because unlike other fields, soft skills do not make the profession run. They gave me a technical interview in which I was able to score very well based on my studying which allowed me to get the job. Also, I was hired under a contract (this is how they hired everyone) so if it didn't work they could let the contract expire without all the messy firing process involved with permanent employees. At the end of my contract I was hired permanently, though.

    Once I had the job, I did find it a challenge for a few months. I was working with people who had 15+ years of experience and M.S. education, and then again there was that thing where they send me all the difficult projects. My manager actually said it was a "trial by fire".

    I'm not sure what you mean by project examples... it's kind of like me telling a story about a guy named Tommy and you want to know who Tommy is... well, you don't know Tommy. I was a senior systems engineer, a lot of the work I did involved getting different electronic systems to communicate and work together, the projects ranged from company expansions and deployments, and forklift upgrades of the existing systems. Most of the other engineers were vetted in a certain specialty so they stuck to doing the same kind of thing over and over with minor tweaks. I guess since I didn't have a specialty I got the stuff which had to have a solution engineered from the ground up, like trying to find your way out of a snow storm without a compass. I can't complain, though, I think this was also why I was able to grow and do well in the field without much experience and I do appreciate my manager a lot.




    I suppose what I would say from all this is again, I don't really think "genius" based on IQ is such a remarkable thing. If we could quantify every aptitude, you'd have all sorts of measurements and I believe we'd find quite a distribution of capability, and the aptitude of logical inference would lose most of it's luster. Actually, the geniuses you mentioned are likely examples of this. How does one grasp language so well as to learn that many by such a young age? It's beyond my intelligence. Same goes for these kids that can play piano like a maestro by age 6. Their mind just "gets it". I actually don't think Einstein was much of a mathematical genius, but rather a physics genius in the sense that his greatest discoveries came through an ability to imagine physical interactions. It is this aptitude that everyone has in varying amounts for varying things. It does nobody good if we place one over the other and all strive for it... instead we should each recognize our strongest aptitudes and use them as a collective.

    We're inclined to think of genius in very narrow-minded applications like mathematics despite the fact that Michelangelo was never considered a genius, yet the statue of David is 100% physiologically accurate. It is this accurate reflection of what is which I consider to be intelligent, and when we see it this way, intelligence is not really much of a quality but an awareness of creation as is. So what shall we say, then? What is genius? Does it really matter? Or is it how each person is made to reflect what-is. So the important question is, what are you reflecting?

  10. #170
    Energizer Bunny Resonance's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    740

    Default

    I think he's legit

    and dissing you, lex, kind of :p not in the active sense but he doesn't think much of you

    not that you've given him any reason for otherwise
    The beauty of a living thing is not the atoms that go into it, but the way those atoms are put together. ~ rCoxI ~ INfj ~ 5w6 so/sp

Similar Threads

  1. To which level of hell are you going?
    By Virtual ghost in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 145
    Last Post: 07-09-2017, 10:13 AM
  2. Is having a tendency to give someone the benefit of the doubt associated with F?
    By /DG/ in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 11-04-2015, 10:23 PM
  3. Do you need to sympathize with characters to enjoy them?
    By Ivy in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 03-07-2008, 03:28 AM
  4. [ENFJ] NT with Announcement to Share about ENFJ Friend :)
    By Usehername in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-24-2007, 03:07 AM

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