# Thread: Qualitative Associations with Superior to Genius Level IQ

1. Originally Posted by Litvyak
Keep in mind that this is based on a SD of 24, while most people calculate their results based on a SD of 15. I suggest you convert the chart to avoid misunderstandings.
24? Thought it was 16. Calculate it at a glance and see for yourself.

2. Originally Posted by Jonnyboy
Could you elaborate? Are you saying that an IQ of 164+ on this chart represents a lower IQ?
The IQ of 164+ on this chart represents an IQ of 140+ if I illustrate the results in a more widely accepted way.

Originally Posted by Jenaphor
24? Thought it was 16. Calculate it at a glance and see for yourself.
I think it's 24. Nevertheless, 15 is used almost everywhere (http://www.paulcooijmans.com/intelligence/sd15.html) to prevent misunderstandings. This is exactly why I don't like people boasting with their IQ without adding the percentile.

"I have an IQ of 132 based on a SD of 15" has meaning.
"I have an IQ larger than 98% of the population" has meaning.
"I have an IQ of 132" means nothing in itself.

Disclaimer: Then again, I'm not a professional so I might be wrong...

3. Originally Posted by Litvyak
I think it's 24. Nevertheless, 15 is used almost everywhere (http://www.paulcooijmans.com/intelligence/sd15.html) to prevent misunderstandings. This is exactly why I don't like people boasting with their IQ without adding the percentile.

"I have an IQ of 132 based on a SD of 15" has meaning.
"I have an IQ larger than 98% of the population" has meaning.
"I have an IQ of 132" means nothing in itself.
SD is the acronym for standard deviation. If you look at Terman's chart, you'll see that each category has a standard deviation of 16.

Having said that, is it possible you're supposing SD is the conversion of comparable metrics to other tests? Terman's chart is based on sb4, where there's a conversion process that needs to happen even when comparing sb4 to sb5, nvm other tests.

4. Originally Posted by Litvyak
The IQ of 164+ on this chart represents an IQ of 140 if I illustrate the results in a more widely accepted way.

I think it's 24. Nevertheless, 15 is used almost everywhere (http://www.paulcooijmans.com/intelligence/sd15.html) to prevent misunderstandings. This is exactly why I don't like people boasting with their IQ without adding the percentile.

"I have an IQ of 132 based on a SD of 15" has meaning.
"I have an IQ larger than 98% of the population" has meaning.
"I have an IQ of 132" means nothing in itself.
Even if it does, it is absolutely not relevant for the purposes of this discussion. No where on the chart that I posted is standard deviation mentioned. I simply wanted to use those ranges and the associated descriptors to aid the discussion and clarify my use of superior, genius, etc.

Looking at my source for that information, I note that 1 standard deviation is approximately 16 points. However, as I stated before, this is really irrelevant, unless one associates the term 'genius' exclusively with those IQs which are more than 4 standard deviations above the mean.

Edit:

Although I appreciate the scrutiny, I cannot help but start to resent the NT contributions to this thread as they seem to only deal with irrelevant minutiae. It's like there is a subconscious need to deviate from the topic at hand in the hopes of finding error or fault. That being said, I still wish for everything to be scrutinized, but please have it be relevant and serve the purpose of enhancing clarity.

5. Originally Posted by Jonnyboy
Looking Also, if anyone has had his/her IQ officially tested, it might be interesting if you'd share it and provide some personal anecdotes about your relationship style, life success, etc.

*Terman's Classification
• 164+ Genius or Near Genius
• 148-164 Very Superior
• 132-148 Superior
• 113-132 Above Average
• 84-113 Average
• 68-84 Dullness
• 52-68 Borderline Deficiency
• Below 52 Definite Feeble-Mindedness
In junior high I tested at 132. At age 24 I tested at 140. So I'm somewhere in that range, give or take.

As far as school, testing, etc, I always did well. I had aptitude in other areas too and always picked up on things quickly.

My social abilities and social confidence have always been very very subpar and I always felt very much 'behind' in this aspect of growth and functioning well & easily with others. This was problematic as a teenager and I basically isolated myself at that time.

I've worked a lot at improving this while in my 20's and early 30's, but I still have considerable social anxiety. Old habits die hard and in the end I'm very introverted so am simply accustomed to keeping everything to myself and not talking a whole lot.

I have been successful in the work force and at accomplishing things. I have always had confidence in my abilities, as well as in getting along with an communicating with people on a more superficial/accomplishment/goal-oriented level - I've just always lacked confidence in social settings and deeply connecting with people, or finding enough commonality between myself and others to have building blocks for building those connections.

Whether this is actually tied to IQ, or my mbti, or my enneagram, or any combination of other things, is the question. They probably all feed into each other, but I wouldn't at all slough it off to IQ alone. I have some high-IQ friends who never had the social struggles/socialization & lack of confidence problems that I had, so there's that.

6. I trust your knowledge, nvm me then

This also means I have to rethink my own results.

7. Originally Posted by Jonnyboy
I'm not sure if a number segregates a people any more than wealth, business success, beauty, etc. I do agree that if a person restricts himself to IQ in his analysis of himself and others that he would miss much; however, this thread is about how IQ might be associated with certain other meaningful characteristics. Since you are the first person in this thread (of whom I know) who has an IQ in the 164+ range, I wonder if you could provide some details about your life experiences. I've heard it mentioned in the past that a 20-30 point difference in IQ makes conversation difficult, and my guess is that your IQ is probably 20 or 30 points higher than my own and many of those who have posted in this thread. Do you find it difficult to talk with most people? Any additional insights would be most appreciated.

P.S. - If you find that there isn't anything meaningful correlated with a high IQ, don't hesitate to say so; but please include reasons (such as personal experience, study, observations). I'm hoping to learn something here.
I'm skeptical of the claims that high IQ makes conversation difficult because I believe intelligence isn't intelligence unless it works accurately, i.e. reflects reality accurately. There are exceptions to this like Kim Peek who are especially brilliant in certain aptitudes due to a lack in others, but for the most part I believe it is the responsibility of a so-called above-average intellect to consider the circumstances as part of the challenge of life and apply itself, leaving little excuse for poor communication skills.

I wouldn't say high IQ is meaningless, it's just that the meaning is a lot different than people think, vastly different. It's such a distinction that I can tell people who are a high IQ from especially ambitious minds (and these people also score well on IQ tests). For the record, an ambitious mind is far better and results of various historical figures will show this. I don't want anyone to think I smell of elitism here because I don't, I find ambitious people like yourself as far more admirable than those who are simply born with this aptitude.

I've always been able to tell the these people apart but it's hard to explain the difference. It's sort of like the difference between people who live in the city, dress expensively, drive a H3 and wear jewelry and sunglasses everywhere from a high performing movie actor or musician. One person has an ambition for fame, the other is simply born with an inescapable quality... this evidences itself in a way that can't be faked. So I've found those who truly have it are usually those like myself who are trying to escape themselves and the way they are naturally than those who pursue intelligence for the sake of it. For instance, another high IQ person in this thread is "whatever", although she may not even know this or care. It's tough to explain but it's just something you sense about a person.

My life experience is somewhat similar to the article about the "outsiders" above.

There is really not that much to say about my life. I'm kind of an extremest. When I was young I realized I had such an awareness of things that where people saw walls, I saw nothing. So I could "walk through walls" in a mental sense. It's hard to explain but it leads to a... euhm... different kind of life and existence, and not one I would describe as friendly. Everyone was afraid, in a way, whether they would admit it (and nobody would), and you could tell just how someone was and what they were afraid of, what they were hiding and hiding from, by the walls they kept in. Early off in life I was determined to knock every one of them down.

One of the first things I remember feeling was the value of truth and wisdom. Knowledge was something everyone had in different qualities and quantities, stored within their walls. But truth and wisdom was something greater, like the mind as a verb rather than a noun, a how instead of a what... and to me of highest value because it provided some kind of anchor in a world without borders. For a lot of my early life until recently I've been devoted to finding "THE" anchor. Christopher Langan, the so-called smartest man in the world I believe calls it his "theory of everything". In a way, it's what everyone is looking for, so again we can see that IQ is not terribly meaningful.

By the time I was a teenager I had already mentally jumped over most of the hurdles that the adults I knew struggled with. At around the age 12 I found that I had already meditated upon just about every purpose of life and found it to be meaningless. I slipped into depression for about 10+ years, but I still never gave up my quest for "the thing". I guess you could call it the meaning of life. Oops I already said that.

So until I was 18 I was pretty restless. I used this time to meditate and perfect a lot of things like awareness of self and others, self control, etc. It was a very boring time and I played a lot of video games. I actually created a lot of problems for myself just because at a certain point it's the only thing left to do.

When I was 18 I moved out with a fresh level of freedom to conquer. I was raised in a religious home, but I threw out everything I new and started from a fresh slate free from controlled influences. I considered myself agnostic and being quite the pragmatic, I considered money to be the most useful thing to attain so I decided to start there. I rented equipment and read books and trained myself. A month before my 20th birthday I got a job as an engineer. My starting salary was \$125,000 a year. I was still a teenager when I got my first paycheck for about \$3,700 bi-monthly.

Due to my age, many people I worked with though I wouldn't last. I was given a lot of work that was entirely original with no established procedures... something that challenged the seasoned professionals I worked with. I can't assume it was to get rid of me but it sometimes seemed that way. Anyways, I worked that job for over 3 years and received over 100% on all except 1 quarterly review and was promoted twice.

Despite the challenge of my job, I completed most of my work in under 30 hours a week and wasn't what you would call "diligent" in my being at work during business hours. So I had quite a bit of free time and money and I experimented with all sorts of things in life. I guess you could call it living the "high life". During this time I also succeeded in a number of activities. In an intellectual sense the most notable was poker. I found the same kind of success and found little competition, although I never played at \$10,000+ stakes so it's not assumable that this would persist against professional players.

All of this amounted to nothing of value to me and a deep sense of burn-out set in. Much like James Sidis and Christopher Langan, I resigned myself from pretty much everything most people would call intelligent and wanted a "normal" life and occupation. However, my consciousness was inescapable and I wasn't dead yet. When I was 21 I found an escape in drinking and marijuana. Just like everything else in life, substance abuse was something I eventually "excelled" in. I had a few failed relationships in this time mostly due to my overwhelming apathy. At one point, I figured my life was useless and decided to join the Navy SEALs so it could at least be useful for something. I trained for about 4 months but never ended up joining.

About a year and a half ago, I reached what I would describe the point of accepting that everything was meaningless. I had more ability, opportunity, and means to discover the meaning of life and I had considered everything, looked everywhere, and found nothing. I had a total breakdown. I stumbled across a mini-book version of "the Purpose Driven Life" in my downtown apartment and that gave me a tiny sliver of hope because it claimed life wasn't about me. Apparently, the meaning of life is God. So amidst a total breakdown I prayed for help. From that point in time, it's become clear to me that God has carried my life forward.

Today I'm a very happy man. I finally discovered the "thing", the ultimate truth, the meaning of life, the thing we all search for. You might be surprised at what it is, though. It is Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ rose from the dead almost 2,000 years ago and is alive today. At this point I'm sure my intellectual credibility is shot, but I am not insane in the least. I feel more healthy and balanced than I have in my entire life. Anyways, the ultimate truth, the theory of everything, the meaning of life, what have you... is Jesus. It's all about Jesus. I'm serious. And that's where I am today.

8. Ding fries are done.

9. Originally Posted by FDG
Over-excitability needn't to be noticeable from the outside; indeed an over-excitable individual might come across as more restrained, because his mental resources are fully concentrated towards filtering all the information he naturally tends to process.
Yes, this is particularly true as the gifted find their excitability is rejected by the normal and so the gifted learn restraint.

10. I am skeptical of IQ, personally. My IQ is only about 120-132 or so, tops, but I can communicate online with people whose iq is probably much higher. If I don't know a word or know of a concept, I will look it up right then and gain at least a basic meaning. So, I am skeptical that iq really conveys the potential of an individual.... in some cases, it only describes how hard a person has worked at gaining knowledge. I think my own potential is much higher than I have ever worked to achieve .... sad, but true.

#### 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