...

[simulatedworld]

Funny. My IQ is "more higher" than average than my EQ, but I am a hardcore E and close on the N/S.

What is an EQ?

 

[Forever_Jung]

I was trying to say that preferences follow abilities for the most part, even though on rare ocassions some S type personalities can rival and even surpass Ns in abstract reasoning.

Yes...I understand the argument, but I was afraid there was a storm a-comin' a la "ESFP Stupid Myth" thread.

 

[pure_mercury]

What is an EQ?

Emotional Quotient. In crude terms, the IQ of interpersonal relationships.

 

[simulatedworld]

Emotional Quotient. In crude terms, the IQ of interpersonal relationships.

Oh ok. Well, there are always exceptions...

 

[Super Nova]

Yes, I have a really hard time with math too.

I'm glad to know I'm not alone in that regard!

 

[Super Nova]

Is it an INFP thing? I think, from what I've seen and heard so far, you guys tend to be writers more than anything, but he's also one of those types that actually pays attention to, and remembers, alot of facts, mostly cultural, historical, and trivial, but not number-oriented.

I have a good memory for trivial things, but no much for important stuff--and I have done a good bit of writing in my life.

 

[BlueScreen]

Oh ok. Well, there are always exceptions...

Yes, it's called a statistical distribution .

 

[Invisiblemonkey]

If any given types would indicate intelligence, I would say INxx would most likely have the highest potential. For one, Introversion is advantageous due to the nonsocial nature of study and the like. Secondarily, an N would most likely have an easier time due to the fact that the recall of any and all facts is essentially, abstract. T/F is counter-intuitively, not an issue here. Intelligence is a function of your ability to understand and retain information, regardless of what you base your decisions on. As for why P/J isn't an issue, it's because of the fact that depending on the type of information, you may or may not need to adhere to a rigid, systematic approach when learning about, and retaining something. While I understand that the topic is on IQ, I assume that it's being used in the vernacular to refer to intelligence.

 

[Amethyst]

IQ does not really = intelligence.

IQ testing was originally meant to test children to see if they were 'smart enough' to be able to go through certain levels of classes, usually general ones, or if they weren't. IQ wasn't really formed to be able to test for higher levels of IQ. For example, I took one IQ test (official from school) and got a 141, then my mom sent me to Sylvan because she thought I was stupid or something (I just didn't care about middle school lol) and I tested 129, both numbers significantly different form another.

Tis flawed.

 

[skylights]

yeah, pretty sure that the type with the highest IQ is the type who most closely achieves the criteria the makers of the IQ test were after at the time they were producing the version they did.

i think it can be useful as a tool to check for learning disability and shouldn't be used for much else than that -- too many people basing self-worth or others' worth off a situation that allows very few people perform to the best of their ability.

(i think the same of the SAT, ACT, GRE, etc...)

 

[Such Irony]

My scores on online tests vary from as low to 110 to as high as 160. I think some of the online tests though are quite inaccurate and some probably inflate your score to a great degree. There's no way I have a 160 IQ.

I got 125 (95th percentile) and that sounds about right. Well above average but no genius.

 

[Amethyst]

yeah, pretty sure that the type with the highest IQ is the type who most closely achieves the criteria the makers of the IQ test were after at the time they were producing the version they did.

i think it can be useful as a tool to check for learning disability and shouldn't be used for much else than that -- too many people basing self-worth or others' worth off a situation that allows very few people perform to the best of their ability.

(i think the same of the SAT, ACT, GRE, etc...)

So do colleges with a potential student's worth, if you're thinking SAT, ACT etc.

 

[Emectar]

As far as i can tell, in general the smartest type is consistently INTP's.

I generally dont think of S's as being very intelligent but thats probably because i dont respect S intelligence enough, (its simply different than n thinking but completely equal in its own way).

In the end though i think that putting IQ and type together is a bad idea because it leads to misunderstanding and ignorance.

Some of the smartest people i know are in the types that might be stereotypically considered ditzy and some of the least intelligent people i know are types that might stereotypically be considered smart. So, all in all, i'd say its unrelated.

 

[miss fortune]

did you just wake up today and think "what can I say to offend whatever today?"

 

[ragashree]

did you just wake up today and think "what can I say to offend whatever today?"

Taking a general comment as personally directed - F
Reading between the lines and making leaps of logic - N

C'mon whatevs, you know you're an NF really! You can't go on hiding it when you display all these NF characteristics!


Anyway, to be fair, all bases ended up being covered with that last comment. This is what's known as giving oneself a getout clause. Even if this did mean that one half of the post completely contradicted the other half. I can't be bothered to analyse the whole thing, let's just sum it up by looking at the first and last statements (which appear to serve as premise and conclusion):

As far as i can tell, in general the smartest type is consistently INTP's.

So, all in all, i'd say its unrelated.

Logic fail.

 

[miss fortune]

we ALL have all of the damned function thingies ragashree

and the getout clause is probably just a sad little plea of "please don't beat me up big scary S people"

I'm not feeling merciful this morning... ... if I had some more time I'd talk about the flaws in test design, the problems with self reporting bias and a failure at posessing adequate information to draw such conclusions, but I don't

 

[ragashree]

we ALL have all of the damned function thingies ragashree

Noo! I swear I don't! For instance, I don't have any Se at all. Function tests prove it and everything! This means that I am not reading your post. But I AM making assumptions based on what I'm not reading. This is why the N function comes across as psychic sometimes. It needs to be to make sense of anything, what with all that it doesn't attend to. And also why it occasionally needs the letters "ot" inserted...

 

[Snuggletron]

As far as i can tell, in general the smartest type is consistently INTP's.

I generally dont think of S's as being very intelligent but thats probably because i dont respect S intelligence enough, (its simply different than n thinking but completely equal in its own way).

 

[Randomnity]

Logic fail.

hahaha, I know, I saw that too but it was just too obvious to mock.

It's sorta like kicking a small retarded boy in the balls after his ice cream cone fell on the ground and a bird crapped on him.

 

[miss fortune]

^ yeah, but this small special child just pissed in my breakfast and has it coming

(I'm not in a grumpy mood anymore but am still disgusted by that post!)

** see randomnity... you DIDN'T kill the thread! I posted after you!