...

[animenagai]

Most robust IQ tests would not be like this.

See the WAIS subscales, for example.

i think i remember doing this one a couple years back. there was this thing on TV called 'test the nation' and i'm pretty sure it had this format. i don't think i've ever been so fucked off with an IQ test. i detest the VIQ shit.

vocab and information was particularly bad for me as they asked local new zealand questions and i had only been back to the country for like a year. memory was also an area i did not like. if einstein told everyone that he can't remember any phone numbers, i don't think anyone would consider him less of a genius. i can see how memory can be a problem if you forget the start of your reasoning by the time you've reached the conclusion, but if it is not TOO low, i can't see how it would be a flaw on your intelligence.

honestly, this format isn't any better than the ones before. in fact, i'll prefer the other ones.

 

[entropie]

In my opinion Einstein was no genius, he was an orderly man. He devoted his thoughts to one single cause and came up with a brilliant idea of how to connect the dots. That made him ingenious but not genius. That whole genius thing was publicated by the media.

If you ask Einstein, why the marmbles in the universe that resemble heavy gravitational objects like a galaxy, do not fall into one whole in the middle in spacetime curvature, but expand. That means if you ask him, why the universe does expand, because that would be illogical according to special relativity. He would say, it is because of the "cosmological constant" namely antigravity.

You see, this can be right or can be not. It is just another idea, derived from a logical concept.

Therefore genius does not exist.

---

The most intresting thing about genius, I think, is the ability to be able to understand the world without participating in it. I guess everyone scores 190 here. But the only problem that still remains is a measurement thing:

You can measure tempreature through a resistor, which drops resistance with rising temperature for example. That is called a PTC resistor (Positive Temperature Coefficient). But you can not build the electrical circuit, if you have no reference resistor. That means, you actually have two voltage outputs, the one from the PTC resistor, which changes and a constant one which does not change and the CPU does compare these two, to output the temperature.

See, life is no constant resistor. It is a changing one. But if you compare it against the MBTI reference, you get some answers. But if you start ignoring life or changing the reference, you loose your temperature. So it is either you, changing everything and having some constant of your own, or it is you, getting lost in the myriads of theory, forgetting about life.

 

[Oleander]

Education evidently has a lot to do with it. How easy is it to speak Latin or Russian? Comes naturally if you're Julius Caesar or Vladimir Putin. On a pernickety point, Einstein never liked the Cosmological Constant because it was just a fix to fit the facts and really amounted to something missing here but has this effect. Queen Elizabeth I spoke six languages and understood three more (including Latin). Most educated ancient Romans wrote Classical Greek.

What does look like Genius to me is Wolfie Mozart playing his way round Europe at age six or something. Nikola Tesla was a genius, Thomas Edison wasn't: he had to work at his stufff, Tesla didn't. Tesla rarely bothered with experimental prototypes or theory, he knew what would work, sketched a patent and built it. Then he mostly forgot about it and went on to something else: the original Mad Scientist (literally - the first three Superman comix based their MS on him) A lot of it would be better than the production equipment ancestral to what we have now. Imagine cordless lighting and hand-held X-ray devices. John von Neumann may have been a genius and so probably was the English mathematician Alan Turing.

 

[lilmunch64]

Wow. I feel like such a fag. The reason why I'm obsessed with this is, let's be honest, it has to do with ME ME ME and it also has to do with human psychology. And I'm obsessed with human psychology cuz im a fag like that. And it's really probably because it is, though in a broader sense, all about ME ME ME.
I'm an ENTP. I totally agree with it, but is that just because that's what I WANT to be?
Anyway, away from me for a moment.
I was trying to figure this out, too. I like seeing all the little names, like, "Inventor," "Nurturer," etc. I would THINK that thinking may be smarter, but I can also see feeling. Because a thinker is so close-minded. A feeler can think beyond, you know? And I would think intuitive types would be smarter. I had a full sentence after that, but then you have to think, what does intelligence even MEAN? Like, they care more about these subjects- but is it just your ability to think or WHAT?
Wow. I am so weird. I like cant even catch up with myself because I'm too dumb to FOLLOW MY OWN TRAIN OF THOUGHT. Now THAT is an insult.
Anywayz,
I heard IQs are really just how "outside of the box" you can think, but it also tests your logic. I would think Extroverted/Introverted might not mean anything themselves, but actually what comes to that conclusion. Like, extroverted people are probably more intuitive, but that's just my biases coming through, correct?
Moving on. Intuitive/Sensing is probably a big thing. For some reason, I keep thinking of "sensing" as a fancy word for "doesn't care, can't think beyond." Like, they're all just stupid and critical thinkers, u know?
And then thinking/feeling. I think "thinking" is just like, another word for close-minded. Except...I think it said I was open minded, and I'm an ENTP- as in thinking- so yeah. But feeling, they might see things more complex and the bigger picture, while thinkers get stuck on the little details. But it SAID it just means that I think logically, but they're trying to make us all happy, aren't they?
And finally, Percieving/Judging. I would think percieving would be smarter because that means that they see THROUGH the facts, while the judging are simply looking at the facts already there, except that means they can like connect things better...
My guess is...x (wait. that means tie, right? Cuz I've been seeing that lately) nfp. so enfp or infp. I'm an ENTP....close enough, right?
OKAY, I am leaving now, because youre probably all bored and i gotta get back to my stupid blog.
I wish they had statistics of personality traits. One final thought.

 

[Vivid]

My IQ test went over a bunch of history and government facts, so it does test knowledge. That makes up about a 10th of the test.
Needless to say, I got below average.
I've heard that INTJs and INTPs have high IQs, but I don't believe there's much merit in that.

 

[Simplexity]

If you really want a discussion about INTJ's and INTP's as they relate to IQ, Go visit INTPc. I hear they might have a thread or two about that topic.

 

[mlittrell]

imo IQ is irrelevant. im not saying this because i have a low IQ in fact my IQ is quite high. but to answer the question i know for a fact that statistically INTJs do the best and NTs in general do excellent.

some of the stupidest people i know have high IQs. the smartest people i know have high EQs

 

[The Ü™]

The fact is that these studies come up with totally different conclusions and there are so many other forms of abstract thinking that an NT would find stimulating that are never even considered on an IQ test and even considered to be in the realm of stupidity by scientific standards.

 

[Kristiana]

Research has shown that in the gifted population, introverts are significantly more common than in the general population. This doesn't mean that all introverts are gifted, but that the two qualities do often correlate.

Also, more than 8 out of 10 National Merit Finalists are N types. This is quite disproportionate to the N types in the general population (2.5 out of 10). Again, this doesn't mean that all N types have high IQs, nor that all people with high IQs are N types, but that N-ness and IQ tend to go together.

 

[gloomy-optimist]

Honestly, I think each type is smartest in some area. You don't have to judge on IQ because I think everyone pretty much agrees that that's no real basis to judge intelligence.
But I notice some types are better with raw facts; some types are better with abstract concepts; some types are better with common sense factors.
So basically, there's no one type that's the most intelligent.

 

[Eileen]

I find this kind of strange because I would imagine that Sensing and Thinking would make one smarter rather than going by one's emotions. Strange...

This betrays your lack of understanding of this typology.

 

[Cimarron]

This betrays your lack of understanding of this typology.

I understand what he's getting at, though. It's why N just seems like "witchcraft" when you're observing it, and not experiencing it yourself.

 

[Grayscale]

the problem here is that there is a difference between saying that IQ testing favors the intuitive style of thinking and that people who have a cognitive preference for intuition are better at IQ testing.

someone who commutes two hours to work and back every day may drive more on average than a professional NASCAR driver, but that doesn't mean they are better at it.

even if IQ was significant, it would be difficult to tie it to a type rather than cognitive functions... which wouldnt say much, since types are just order of preference of the same CPs.


lastly, if you were to correlate IQ to a CP, it would be a thinking function, it wouldnt make any sense whatsoever for it to relate to feeling, introversion, extroversion, sensing, or intuition as i would define it, just thinking... ie Ti or Te. type is still irrelevant, though, because even an IxFP or ExFJ could have a stronger thinking function than IxTP or ExTJ.

Mensa Fun Test

how would emotions prove useful here? how would an "ability to sense or know immediately without reasoning" going to help you solve mathematical problems? if the questions were truly intuitive, then they'd be too easy, most IQ tests want to test your critical thinking and reasoning skills. Let us look at the first question:

"Sally likes 225 but not 224; she likes 900 but not 800; she likes 144 but not 145. Which does she like?"

A) 1600
B) 1700

Sally likes 1600, because being a square number is the only mathematical attribute that both fits all of the numbers she likes and differentiates A from B. She doesn't like 1600 because of some mystical bond she feels with it along with the the others, 1600 doesn't look anything like the others, and although someone might say they just intuitively "knew" it was 1600, the logical (ie, Tx) reasoning above is the only way someone could consistently come to the correct answer.




what we need is a test that could measure the strength of the cognitive functions instead of just the order.

 

[entropie]

what we need is a test that could measure the strength of the cognitive functions instead of just the order.

You sound like an engineer and I dread them

 

[BlueScreen]

how would emotions prove useful here? how would an "ability to sense or know immediately without reasoning" going to help you solve mathematical problems? if the questions were truly intuitive, then they'd be too easy, most IQ tests want to test your critical thinking and reasoning skills. Let us look at the first question:

"Sally likes 225 but not 224; she likes 900 but not 800; she likes 144 but not 145. Which does she like?"

A) 1600
B) 1700

Sally likes 1600, because being a square number is the only mathematical attribute that both fits all of the numbers she likes and differentiates A from B. She doesn't like 1600 because of some mystical bond she feels with it along with the the others, 1600 doesn't look anything like the others, and although someone might say they just intuitively "knew" it was 1600, the logical (ie, Tx) reasoning above is the only way someone could consistently come to the correct answer.

what we need is a test that could measure the strength of the cognitive functions instead of just the order.

You've obviously never experienced Ne. Some things are initially learned using thinking, but Ne will do any of them. And it is evolutionary. It reworks itself and develops new thinking systems on the fly. It maps whole systems out on just seeing them. It sees patterns where no one else would notice any order. And it has little or no fear of complexity, as long as the data is present to intuit it.

Your example is perfect for Ne, as is most of an IQ test. I glanced at it and thought "yeh, whatever, square numbers, 1600." Rather than thinking, each step just hits you as an intuit, with reasoning included (because you are consciously aware of the workings of extroverted functions). Also if you think thinking is needed for new things: My father is an INTP with IQ 180. I can answer complex questions about new things I've never seen before faster than him nearly 100% of the time. For him the foreignness of the system takes a while to accept and understand. For Dom Ne, on the other hand, a solution is extrapolated from previous systems almost instantly. And then confirmed against potential realities and impacts; usually down to the last detail about what will and won't work.

On IQ tests the only questions I pause on are vocabulary related when they ask which word describes something best and I don't know the definitions that well, though that doesn't happen now I write more. And the other is when they say which is the odd one out, and I see more than one valid option because whoever wrote the test wasn't an EN*P so left it semi-ambiguous. In these situations I normally think what would the test writer choose, and go for the most boring option .

 

[Tiltyred]

On the math thing -- the reason I flunked math all my life had nothing to do with math but rather with math classes and how the teachers insisted you come to the front of the class and do problems on the board. I can't do that. And if I think I'll be called upon, I can't think. I can't work if someone's watching me. Math class made me nauseated with anxiety.

But one time my family moved someplace where we would only be there a few months, and I talked to the math teacher and he agreed to basically pretend I did not exist (let me sit in the back and promised never to call on me for any reason) so I could relax ... and I made an A in algebra and I loved it. I finally fell into the groove.

I took logic instead of math in college and I loved it and made As.

 

[FDG]

On the math thing -- the reason I flunked math all my life had nothing to do with math but rather with math classes and how the teachers insisted you come to the front of the class and do problems on the board. I can't do that. And if I think I'll be called upon, I can't think. I can't work if someone's watching me. Math class made me nauseated with anxiety.

But one time my family moved someplace where we would only be there a few months, and I talked to the math teacher and he agreed to basically pretend I did not exist (let me sit in the back and promised never to call on me for any reason) so I could relax ... and I made an A in algebra and I loved it. I finally fell into the groove.

I took logic instead of math in college and I loved it and made As.

Ahah, you know, I'm completely the opposite. I always do my best at subjects where I know I am going to talk and explain the problems in front of the class.

 

[gloomy-optimist]

I honestly think "intelligence" is independent of type. There are smart people and dumb people in every type.
The only difficult thing is finding something that would accurately gauge intelligence, since certain types are better with certain types of tests due to ways of coming to conclusions (cognitive functions).

I think we should just not worry about it; measuring overall "intelligence" is a little too specific to too many factors.

 

[mlittrell]

ha i posted the same thing twice lol

 

[fleurdujour]

the problem here is that there is a difference between saying that IQ testing favors the intuitive style of thinking and that people who have a cognitive preference for intuition are better at IQ testing.

someone who commutes two hours to work and back every day may drive more on average than a professional NASCAR driver, but that doesn't mean they are better at it.

even if IQ was significant, it would be difficult to tie it to a type rather than cognitive functions... which wouldnt say much, since types are just order of preference of the same CPs.


lastly, if you were to correlate IQ to a CP, it would be a thinking function, it wouldnt make any sense whatsoever for it to relate to feeling, introversion, extroversion, sensing, or intuition as i would define it, just thinking... ie Ti or Te. type is still irrelevant, though, because even an IxFP or ExFJ could have a stronger thinking function than IxTP or ExTJ.

Mensa Fun Test

how would emotions prove useful here? how would an "ability to sense or know immediately without reasoning" going to help you solve mathematical problems? if the questions were truly intuitive, then they'd be too easy, most IQ tests want to test your critical thinking and reasoning skills. Let us look at the first question:

"Sally likes 225 but not 224; she likes 900 but not 800; she likes 144 but not 145. Which does she like?"

A) 1600
B) 1700

Sally likes 1600, because being a square number is the only mathematical attribute that both fits all of the numbers she likes and differentiates A from B. She doesn't like 1600 because of some mystical bond she feels with it along with the the others, 1600 doesn't look anything like the others, and although someone might say they just intuitively "knew" it was 1600, the logical (ie, Tx) reasoning above is the only way