User Tag List

Results 1 to 2 of 2

  1. #1

    Default Do you think he actually got dumber? If so, what caused it?

    Posts leading up to the creation of this thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by UnitOfPopulation View Post
    Well one time i had pneumonia, the fever run much higher than what will usually kill a person. I was 22. There were hallucinations, dreams of panic where my limbs where torn off. The tearing off limbs seemed mild and quaint compared to what I was going through and gave a sense of satisfaction and serenity. So when I woke up I was in real panic. This continued for a day or two, after which I was never quite the same.
    Quote Originally Posted by UnitOfPopulation View Post
    Shocked out of shyness. Realization life can end at any moment. Thinking about what I want to experience in life, I wanted to do more daring stuff. And I did.

    Edit: and .. you don't want to hear this, but my IQ dropped from child-genius levels to just "smart". Uncomfortable hearing, much?
    Quote Originally Posted by StonedPhilosopher View Post
    What the fuck are you serious!?!???? From what to what? By "child-genius," do you mean you were tested as a child and weren't tested again until you were a fully-grown adult, post-NDE? Can you elaborate? What ages did you take IQ tests? What were the results? What did you get on the SAT/ACT, and what year did you take them, if you took them? Fuck, I was planning on retaking the SAT because I know I can/could've beat my current best (1490; 730 verbal 760 math (they changed it back to 1600) 6/5/6 essay (all in one sitting)), but if I got dumber then I'm not only fucked for that, but for life .
    Quote Originally Posted by UnitOfPopulation View Post
    As a part of course in study of information, our teacher directed us to some online assesments of IQ she thought valid. So I took one of them. I followed the guideline, took it alone, didn't look up the answers before. The result 170 came with a statement that the score was extrapolated, as in, it was not completely supported by statistical evidence as results above 160 were rare.

    I took some similar assessments after and they told a similar story.

    After pneumonia, I took similar assessments, including an official one. They centered around 150 or so.

    Before I took it for granted I could finish my studies with ease and get a doctoral degree, but my ability to work was so diminished my wishes never came true. 150 is just smart in my books, not genius, IQ wise. I've had to do real work since for anything to count. I can't just rest on my laurels so to speak. Yeah, it would definitely be nice to have +20 IQ but this is where it stays.

    I don't know what std you use in America but these tests had std, standard deviation of 24. So, 170 meant slightly below 3 deviations above average.
    Quote Originally Posted by StonedPhilosopher View Post
    First off, America's standard deviation is typically 15. On that scale, your former IQ would be 143.75 and your latter would be 131.25.

    But you said the former test was not only online, but also not even fucking completely supported. Only official ones should count.

    And regarding your degree, here's a little anecdote:

    I'd never had any trouble with math; ever since I was in kindergarten, I understood every concept--and the underlying reasons why they worked--before the teacher explained them. I was in a slightly-above-average (was too lazy to do honors just because) math class in Junior year (11th grade), and I just played Pac-Man on my graphing calculator and still got an A. Homework never took more than five minutes to complete. Whenever I raised my hand in the class, the teacher said stuff like "anyone besides StonedPhilosopher know the answer?" The class covered the stuff right before calculus: function manipulation (including composites and inverses), real/imaginary solutions, polynomial division/factoring, advanced (and circle) trigonometry, and basically everything else up to instantaneous rates of change.

    Early last summer--before the incident this thread is about--I took a two-week placement course that covered the extra honors-level material needed for AB Calculus. I figured I didn't have to pay any attention and could just immediately figure out how to do instantaneous rates of change and all that other stuff, but I actually couldn't. For the first time, I had to actually memorize a few formulas; while I basically immediately picked them up, I still had to do "real work" unlike before.

    Basically, what I'm trying to say is that maybe your ability didn't decrease, but the content's complexity increased.
    Quote Originally Posted by StonedPhilosopher View Post
    Actually, can you get medically checked for brain damage or something? Wouldn't have they told you if you got mild brain damage from the pneumonia? Or do you live in a third-world country?

    Only the pneumonia could cause a drop in IQ; how would a NDE make you dumber? Get checked. I'm actually really curious. It sounds like some shit out of a TV show or tabloid.
    Likes UnitOfPopulation liked this post

  2. #2
    filling some space UnitOfPopulation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007


    I may have jumped to the conclusion without proper diagnosis, but you got to understand my background: I got no help from doctors back then. Some advised me to go to a support group, some performed neurological tests on me, others made me do tests like listening comprehension, pattern recognition or some other kinds of tests of person's ability. Some people just listened to me and said I don't sound like a person with brain injury. One doctor doubted the validity of intelligence measures beyond 2 deviations above average and noted that all available data on the merits of high intelligence is based on tests which measure no more than 2 deviations above average. Comparing the results to those from general population, the doctors found nothing wrong and offered no kind of brain imaging tests or other forms of diagnosis which would have produced hard evidence. Neither would the offer any help, apart from meetings in a support group.

    One test I had to perform as part of the hiring process showed I'm comparatively more prone to distraction in work compared to other professionals, my work is relatively free of error, but I work more slowly. This test was adjusted for professionals in jobs requiring the highest cognitive ability of any population, not the general population. In any case, comparisons with the general population was all that the doctors ever did.

    As for math, I had pretty much the same experience you did. One time in high school I skipped most of the math lessons and all the exercises entirely for 2 months and the grade dropped. I learned I have to put something in for something to come out, so I resumed putting few hours a work per month to continue getting the top grades. In university, I had pretty easy time getting good grades now that I knew I had to work for them.

    I would welcome a +20 IQ boost if one were available. The professional work setting is pretty hard, the demands to continuously educate myself is pretty taxing and I'd like it to become easier. The success is just low to moderate and I'd rather have the learning part become easy rather than hard. When I push my limits I'd rather win a competition than to place in the middle.

    I think the early IQ results were just about as reliable as possible. The test makers had extrapolated the IQ score range based on a best fit between observations from test group and a parametric curve, and they had a peer-reviewed analysis of their method along with reliability and accuracy estimations, showing the test was good. Extending the range of IQ tests above norm + 2 deviations was supposedly pretty new back then.

    Some research has been made on topic of intelligence since then. IQ above standard + 2 deviations doesn't much matter in most occupations. It's supposedly a non-issue. The intelligence distribution doesn't follow the standard deviation, either. There are more people in the +3, +4 and +5 range than predicted according to the standard distribution. The over-representation can get higher than 10 times the predicted number in the extremely high range. The expected number of people alive with high enough IQ is below 0.5 persons for this planet and it's population, so in all probability, no such people should be around. Instead we have 2 to 3 tested individuals and some others might go untested. Someone had to test them and convince others the results should be believed, and they did.

    The post is way past TL;DR so I'll just cut it here!

    I trust the validity of at least one the pre-NDE IQ tests and at least one of the post-NDE test. In lack of help from the doctors, I've made my own hypothesis. I don't spend time entertaining hypothesis, though, but I'm trying to arrange my work settings and habits the best I can to get the best of what I have now.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 29
    Last Post: 11-25-2013, 11:39 AM
  2. What personality type do you think he has?
    By Tish211 in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-05-2011, 06:32 AM
  3. Obama's handwriting got revealed... What do you think of his type?
    By IEE623 in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 01-26-2009, 06:51 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