Not to shovel earth on your fire, but the SAT tests material which most people with average IQs can learn, and I wouldn't consider such scholastic tests to be reliable gauges of intelligence. I have known people who weren't the brightest of the bunch, but managed to increase their ACT/SAT scores drastically (ten points or above on the ACT; hundred or above on SAT) through simple study nonetheless. They are no longer acceptable entrance materials into the prominent high IQ societies, as far as I know.
Yes, well. It's not scientific. I'm just talking about walking in and testing offhanded aptitude, which serves pretty well at illustrating the point at hand.
Since I don't do the rote thing, I don't really study. Never have much understood the point of it. I figure if I don't have a subject down by the time of a test there's no good forcing the issue.
The answer is no....personally, I've done well in math up to senior year in high school, where I got a progress report for reaching a D in Calculus, halfway into the second semester. I took two semesters of Calculus in college, after a while I couldn't be assed to care and I ended up with C's in both Calc 1 and 2. In hindsight I should've put forth slightly more effort, but that is hindsight.
Still using a needle to break apart a grain of sand.
if i really AM an INTP and not an ISTP...then absolutely not.
as a matter of fact, i have documented learning problems that deal with abstract (ie algebra and higher math, among other things) thought processes. of course this is at least partially due to my disability being spina bifida- having a spinal cord problem plus hydrocephalus that required a shunt certainly had some sort of impact on my brain...
this is the point where i sit here and get lost in theoretical questions of whether or not that changes everything in regards to me and the MBTI